Cosmic Queries: Star Trek

Listen On

About This Episode

Join Neil deGrasse Tyson and co-host Leighann Lord as they boldly go where no one has gone before: answering fan questions about Star Trek. Are cloaking devices possible, and why do the Klingons and Romulans have them but the Federation doesn’t? How does Geordi La Forge’s multi-spectrum visor work, and why doesn’t everyone in the future use them? Are collective intelligences like the Borg evil? You’ll find out how transporter beams might work, and whether they result in an exact duplicate of you with your thoughts and memories or merely a biological clone. Explore the physics of folding space with a warp drive, and whether the Alcubierre drive is science fact or science fiction. Neil and Leighann discuss alien species and whether a warlike, self-limiting culture like the Klingons would even make it out into space before destroying themselves. You’ll also discover which ship Neil thinks is better, the USS Enterprise or the Ship of the Imagination from COSMOS.

In This Episode

Music in This Episode

Episode Topics

  • Stephen Ball

    This is the episode I always wanted!

  • Harry Palm

    I think Neil deGrasse Tyson missed the point of the transporter question. The question is really are you being transported to a new destination when you get in the transporter or are you being disintegrated when you get in it and it’s a copy of you that appears in the destination. If it’s a copy, then, in effect, Captain Kirk and anyone else that got beamed somewhere in ‘Star Trek’ died every time get got beamed and it’s an unaware clone that appears in the new place.

    • Teleri

      There’s a short story somewhere out there about that 😀

      • Randy H.

        Actually one of the first Trek novels, “Spock Must Die”, dealt with this issue directly.

    • eljayh

      He answered that. You missed it.

      • Harry Palm

        Not really. He’s talking about an identical copy of you but there wasn’t much talk about whether or not you die when you get teleported. If you get in a teleporter and you’re disintegrated and an exact copy of you appears in the new spot, you’re dead. It doesn’t matter if the copy is identical and completely unaware. You’re gone. So, that’s the debate about ‘Star Trek’ transporters: are they transporting people or are they killing them and creating copies? He didn’t really get into that. He was focusing more on the technical aspects of converting someone into energy but not the ‘do you die when you get beamed up?’ thing.

    • Crossrifles

      Agreed, but based upon Tyson’s response, it would be a copy and therefore, everyone who is transported is killed in the process.

      And wasn’t the guest supposed to be a major Star Trek fan??? She would know that the reason why the Federation doesn’t have a cloaking device, was because of a peace treaty with the Romulans.

    • Ben Irvin

      I don’t think he did. He did say it was a perfect clone but for all intents and purposes it is you ’cause all the neurological signals and pathways are copied too. Therefor it has all your thoughts and memories making the distinction between clone and original purely academic.

      • Harley M. Gentry

        It’s ‘you’, but not your consciousness.

        In effect, you died – And nobody knows because an exact perfect copy of every single piece of matter that made you up, is standing in your place with all of your memories up the the point you were beamed, all your emotions, everything.

        That’s my take on it. It’s you, but not “you”.

        • Andy Van

          I think Sci-Fi fans are hopefully believing in some sort of Quantum lock mechanism that binds your soul to the electronic signals in your brain regardless of if they are running on the flesh of your brain or the data banks of a transporter. Allowing for the destruction of you physical body without having to end your consciousness, essentially allowing you to live through the process even if your body didn’t. It would revolutionize surgery at the same time, their medical bay should have been just another transporter lol. Just fix whats wrong with code before recreating and re-inhabiting your body. Sort of like Rusty Ventures process for cloning his sons, except he has to grow the bodies. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhZjQwHJFJY
          Rusty claims Church and Laboratory are equals, as is Soul and Synapses and a computer can serve as purgatory.
          They even allude to later in the series that the boys remember their deaths but vaguely, as dreams.

    • Kris Reddish

      However, if you are an identical clone to the quantum level, then its largely just semantics. If the original person was not destroyed that would be an issue though. As it stand though there is no tangible difference between the person that was, and the person that is, other than location. Meaning you would still be you, far stranger imagine you could move in space so far that you ran into an object of your same volume, same density and shared the same quantum states? What would you call it, would you be… so and so 2 to it, and it be so and so 2 too you?

      • Rolf Ralfsen

        It’s semantics (or sci-fi philosophy). The real question is, is there anything to stop you from making more than one copy (or even just not disintegrating the original, like you mentioned)?

        • Kris Reddish

          We are not sure, but it is not out of the realm of possibility, who can predict technology far into the future with certainty? I would certainly like a better explanation of a Heisenberg compensator than offered by the shows. However we have already begun to start finding ways to bend that rule a bit so the idea of one being created is not so far fetched, though the power requirement and many details of a transporter lie in the far distant future if at all. If we achieve this, then we have to worry about that. Yes though, I do not see see any rule in the cosmos to exclude an identical copy of you.

      • Devin

        This happened to Riker in the Next Generation series. He was beamed back up from an away mission, but (iirc) the signal encountered an error due to the planet’s atmosphere. His pattern reached the Enterprise and he was there, but the error tripped a failsafe in the pattern buffer on the planet, and he rematerialized there as well. The duplicate Riker was then stranded there for something like 12 years because no one knew he existed. In the end of the episode, he ended up going by his middle name to avoid confusion. Lt. Thomas Riker.

      • Joshua Smith

        I don’t understand why you need to bring things “down to the quantum level” for this. Very, very few biological systems operate on the quantum level (a neuron, for example, despite the rantings of nuts like Deepak Chopra, is almost certainly a classical system in terms of everything that matters), and besides, you’re not “an identical clone” of yourself ten years ago. Many or most of your constituent atoms are different, and the same kinds of things go for your mind: you’ve learned new things, forgotten some things, and your tastes, preferences, and opinions have changed in various ways. Or take somebody with advanced Alzheimer’s, or a traumatic brain injury.

        I agree that it’s fair to say it would still be you; I just don’t think you need anything close to an exact clone to say that. Ultimately this comes down to a Ship of Theseus problem, and identity of human minds or anything else is more a convenience for discourse than something that holds up to even the most tentative philosophical inquiry.

    • Gus M-B

      It’s actually a very difficult philosophical question. Neurologically speaking, your mind is an emergent phenomenon of electrical signals moving between different parts of your brain. So even without going through the transporter, it’s hard to say if you are the same person from one second to the next anyway. So physics alone isn’t really gonna get you there. Then again, maybe you could rationalize that the electrons that make up those signals are also sent through the particle stream so nothing changes in the transporter at a rate any faster than outside of the transporter.

    • Cristian Filip

      It’s not really a copy… Yes, you cease to exist in your natural state but the process is reversible. You are transformed in energy then you are reconstructed using that beam of energy. “Beam me up”, remember? Not “transport me”, not “teleport me”…

    • mellored .

      Cells divide and get renewed constantly.

      Thus, in many respects, you are clone of who you where a week ago.

    • Joshua Smith

      I am so unimpressed by this line of thinking. What makes me crazy is that there was a survey of philosophers that had this problem, with the two options being “death” and “survival”, and I’m reading some of these results and saying “why can’t it be both?” Oh sure, the “you” on the origin side unquestionably is torn to bits and “dies”, but I haven’t heard a single suggestion for why the copy wouldn’t be “you” that couldn’t already apply to living people that we generally agree are at least largely the same person as they were decades before.

      If teletransporters are ever perfected (which is extremely farfatched, but whatever), I’ll happily get into one. Heck, I’d do something crazier–I’d let my mind be copied if that technology ever came about, and that would be much less like the me at this moment typing this than the copy in the fanciful Star Trek example, but as long as the copy is even mostly faithful to the networks and patterns of firing of my brain, I’m satisfied to say it’s me. In that case, there are then two people, who are different people now but are nonetheless both the same person as the person before the copy was made. It’s kind of like a software fork, where two different software packages (e.g. FreeBSD and NetBSD) are nonetheless the same project (in the case of FreeBSD and NetBSD, 386BSD) if you go back to before they forked.

    • calyn manzer

      Hello I’m not sure if be really missed the point of the the question. But to the best of my knowledge this question would be an unknowable question. Becouse first you would have to define what makes you live. For example are you what is in you DNA or is you what is your brain? Is there something else that makes us, us? (A “soul”) if what makes you, you is In your DNA or your brain and you make a copy of of Esther if would have to be an exact copy of you for it to be you. If you change a little thing then, the you that got teleported would stop existing and a different would be a different person or by extension a different species.

      If you can prove whether or not there is a soul the you could be rich. But the same rules would apply. If you have a soul then and you copped it perfectly along with everything els. the all of yoh that is you would stop existing at that spot and would start exiting it that place.

      You would also have to define death. If death is when your body stops existing. then yes you would die and get reborn. Or if copped or printed wrong the you that got teleported would no longer exist.

      But I could be wrong I did drop out of high school, and have never been to college.

    • calyn manzer

      Another question this would pose is if we have a “soul” and we copyed Kirk with out one, would he get one?

      • Daniel Burnett

        That’s a moot question, because it (a) assumes a soul exists, and (b) fails to define the word “soul” used in the question.

    • Mr. Spock

      You are I are just particular piles of atoms. It doesn’t matter where they are or how they got there.

  • Kris Reddish

    Professor Tyson,the way describe the brain reminded me of having having volatile memory and I am not so sure about that. If you copy every chemical, and every physical structure in the brain, it may still your thoughts and memories. I mean how neurons are linked in communication though axons, dendrites, seem to be the you more then any other definition. Of course take that with a huge grain of salt, I study physics not neuroscience. Also when are you going to get to blue sunrises on Mars? what is the method of scattering. What are your thoughts about selective near forward scattering? Keep up the good work though, you inspire millions to learn more about science.

  • My understanding of the Alcubierre drive is that 1) it works by compressing the space in front of the vessel (and naturally expanding the space behind it), that 2) it requires the equivalent of the mass of Jupiter to work and 3) someone has come up with a way to reconfigure it so that it may require a lot less than that. Failing a warp drive, we could always download our consciousnesses into digital form and become basically immortal, making trips around the galaxy at subluminal speeds a lot more realistic.

  • Sterp2015

    Our dreams are the religion.of science. All believers, “Bow down to our dreams.”

  • Kana Sihsobhon

    The lame reason why The Federation does not have cloaking device is because they signed The Treaty of Algeron with The Romulans that prohibits them from developing Cloaking Device.

    • Taxil Necrobane

      That is just another reason for my disapproval of the Star Trek story setting. It does not make any sense at all.

      • Randy H.

        Nonsense. Peace treaties that are agreed on (rather than imposed) exist for one purpose: peace conditioned upon doing or refraining from doing what a government would otherwise wish to do. For example, current discussions between the US and Iran regarding nuclear weapons – if all goes well Iran will agree to forgo nuclear research in exchange for (more) peaceful relations. The Federation must have felt it an appropriate price to pay – despite some secret research behind the curtain. (Of course the storytelling reason is Roddenberry didn’t want the Feds skulking about the galaxy in secret – he felt it unworthy of peaceful explorers.)

        • Taxil Necrobane

          The Romulans were untrustworthy and any peace agreements with them will fail. Even the Kiligons were better than them! They had a sense of honor at least. Peace agreements only work once you completely defeat the other side. Thankfully with the new Trek movies and the complete reboot of the lore, the new Romulans (and the Federation) are becoming much more realistic in actions. I do admit that Roddenberry was quite the Idealist, and that is fine by me. He was more of an Idealist than I am I would like to think.

    • Dave

      Beat me to it. The Federation won’t use cloaking because of the treaty.
      There is a whole episode in the Next Generation where Riker’s former ship was involved in secretly developing a cloaking device.

  • Gus M-B

    the worst in star trek science inaccuracies is, by far, everything biology; especially evolution. absolutely terrible through and through

    • Taxil Necrobane

      Another ‘head banging on the wall’ idiot thing that the Federation has as a trait is that ANY genetic engineering is forbidden. Even to remove genetic disorders or to ease the problem with aging. Yes, Yes, I know Khan was the thing that made people shy away from biological improvement, but that was a full across the board improvement. Simple corrections to DNA should be acceptable to society in Star Trek verse, but sadly it does not seem so.

      • Randy H.

        DNA changes are seen taking place throughout the show in medical applications to combat problems, including for aging. What is culturally (and legally) restricted is wholesale genetic engineering for specific traits.

        • Taxil Necrobane

          I always got that there is a subtle bias against the use of genetic engineering. Much like the taboo of having tattoos in Japan. You can have them, but don’t expect to be welcomed much if you get found out you do have it.

    • Taxil Necrobane

      Another ‘head banging on the wall’ idiot thing that the Federation has as a trait is that ANY genetic engineering is forbidden. Even to remove genetic disorders or to ease the problem with aging. Yes, Yes, I know Khan was the thing that made people shy away from biological improvement, but that was a full across the board improvement. Simple corrections to DNA should be acceptable to society in Star Trek verse, but sadly it does not seem so.

  • The reason why the Federation doesn’t have a cloaking device is because of the Treaty of Algeron. That treaty forbade Federation from developing a cloaking device (even though they did violate this treaty, as shown in TNG episode “Pegasus”).

    • msfrost

      So, they stole a Cloaking Device.

      • If you mean the one used in the Defiant, nope, they didn’t steal it. It was operated by a romulan officer with the authority granted by the Romulan Star Empire for that one, and only one cloaking device to be used in that very ship, the only Federation ship with a cloaking device.
        If you are referring to the Pegasus, then, afaik, was not stolen, but was developed by the Federation themselves, and was much more than just a cloaking device. You could basically fly through objects in space with it, and the malfunction of the device was what brought the ultimate bad fate of the Pegasus, and the deaths of the crew except Riker and that one Admiral.

  • rlanman

    About the warp numbers: From a Calc I perspective, if you have a vertical derivative (or tangent line), you have an instantaneous rate of change of (+/-) infinity. If you use this as an analogy for your warp speed, then what you are ultimately concerned with is the scale at which you measure the distance traveled. That is, “warp” does not equal “Speed of Light” — Warp is *infinitesimally close* to c, with increasing warp factors getting infinitesimally close*r* to c.

    So, warp “1” (I’m not a trekker, so forgive me if I get the nomenclature wrong) might get you from Earth to, say, Neptune in what feels like an instantaneous amount time, but if you scaled it up to a neighboring star it would actually take …time — say an hour. Well, at that not-really-infinite velocity, it would still take years to get between galaxies. Warp 2 would get you to the star instantly, 3 the other side of the galaxy, and so on, until you get to 10, where you’re sufficiently close to c that you exhibit the properties of photons — as soon as you’re emitted, you’re absorbed.

    • Thommy Holmström

      Actually c is not a factor in the function of an Alcuberrie drive, no matter can move faster than c just as you assume but the Alcuberrie drive compresses and expands spacetime itself in a given direction, spacetime itself can and does move faster than c (see expansion and acceleration of the observable universe).

      If your initial relative velocity is X and you engage warp the spacetime bubble around you moves at a factorial magnitude of X, say that factor is 10, to an outside observer you would move X^10 which can easily be faster than the speed of light, you would however be receding so fast that to the observer you would simply disappear, just as anything behind you would recede faster than the light reflected from them would be able to catch up to you. Navigation is an issue as the photons emitted or reflected from anything else would reach you at c(X^10) making even small changes at a long distance appear to happen faster, like the movement of distant stars and planets. Imagine being a lightyear away from earth and being able to clearly see the position of the earth in the system, you would be viewing the earth from one year ago, depending on your warp factor the planet’s orbit would appear to speed up at your warp factor and you might for example see the earth complete one whole orbit in minutes before finally reaching your destination, making navigation a true hazard of such travel. On a side-note: Any trip to a destination would indeed take time to complete and but would not cause any time dilation as you are not actually traveling any closer to c then you were before, the compressed spacetime around you is the only “thing” actually moving.

      You would not exhibit the properties of photons but there would indeed be a magical warp factor that you could hypothetically reach in which your distance over time approaches absolute infinity in which case the spacetime around you would effectively inhabit every point in the universe simultaneously due to any distance being traversable in zero time, this would however not mean that the matter inside the spacetime bubble would exist in every point at the same time and any useful navigation would be null and void as there would be no way to detect either position, direction or distance to any object due to the photons hitting you at an infinite rate.

      In any case, c is not a factor in your motion, it is only a factor in how you navigate.

  • Pingback: Around the Podosphere: Podcasts of Note for 2/23/15 | The Skiffy and Fanty Show()

  • Dave

    I have always wondered what the effects of using Warp Drive, (or any other type of space bending travel) would be.

    Also, what would happen to the space being folded, that does not sound comfortable? What kind of harm may occur?

  • Lars Larson

    On the topic of whether we would gain from an interaction with a more advanced alien species…and, of course, mixing Star Trek references…

    We would have to assume that this more advanced species would also have a “Prime Directive” and therefore we would never know we had been contacted. So there.

    The arrogance we show to assume that any of our “contacts” would ever let us know they were there is inexcusable.

  • Arlen Kundert

    I was listening to this podcast and when Leighann read the question about the Enterprise vs “The Ship of the imagination”, I had an epiphany.

    The character in “Cosmos: A Personal Voyage” & “Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey” is another Time Lord that survived the “Time Wars” with the Daleks, and “The Ship of the Imagination” is a T.A.R.D.I.S. that doesn’t have it’s exterior imaging projector damaged (so it’s not stuck in “Police Box” display)!

    Think about, it can go anywhere in space and time, and the outside of “The Ship of the Imagination” can be any size on the outside, while staying the same size on the inside (“…bigger on the inside than on the outside…”)!!

    The character called Dr Tyson in the second Cosmos is the same reincarnated Time Lord called Dr Sagan in the first Cosmos! A Time Lord with a Mid-west American accent! A lot of planets have a Mid-west!

    Think about it!!!

    • startalkradio

      Very creative, Mr. K. But don’t be surprised if UNIT comes knocking on your door for spilling state secrets.

      • Arlen Kundert

        (Tongue in check)

        And his sense of humor is quirky as any Time Lord we’ve ever seen, and…

        *tranquilizer dart hits back of neck*

        *men in black suits drag limp body away in unmarked black van*

        • Taxil Necrobane

          *Run out from behind a building and points my Sonic Screwdriver at the van*

          *The van self dismantles and I toss a knock out grenade at the startled MIBs*

          *K-9 Mark 1 follows me pulling a cart as I drag Aelen’s limp body onto the cart and we all dash into a colorful tent*

          *The tent slips off into time and space*

  • Arlen Kundert

    I was listening to this podcast and when Leighann read the question about the Enterprise vs “The Ship of the imagination”, I had an epiphany.

    The character in “Cosmos: A Personal Voyage” & “Cosmos: A Spacetime Odyssey” is another Time Lord that survived the “Time Wars” with the Daleks, and “The Ship of the Imagination” is a T.A.R.D.I.S. that doesn’t have it’s exterior imaging projector damaged (so it’s not stuck in “Police Box” display)!

    Think about, it can go anywhere in space and time, and the outside of “The Ship of the Imagination” can be any size on the outside, while staying the same size on the inside (“…bigger on the inside than on the outside…”)!!

    The character called Dr Tyson in the second Cosmos is the same reincarnated Time Lord called Dr Sagan in the first Cosmos! A Time Lord with a Mid-west American accent! A lot of planets have a Mid-west!

    Think about it!!!

  • untitleded

    YESSSSSSS 🙂

  • Joshua Smith

    Leighann Lord’s question about the VISOR was awesome. I can come up with an answer, though I’m not familiar enough with Star Trek: TNG trivia to know if it fits Geordi, but what if he got the VISOR at a very young age? It’s not so much a question of eyes, but of his brain, which could be accustomed from infancy with dealing with a very wide spectrum, whereas a non-blind person putting on a VISOR would either have a nonsensical mish-mash, or would have to tune it to correspond roughly to the visual spectrum, just shifted up or down.

    The science fiction writer Greg Egan’s most recent story is like this. It’s called “Seventh Sight”, and there’s a kid, blind from birth but with optical implants, who hacks his implants with his smartphone to have five discrete sensing ranges for visible light (instead of the three our cones provide), plus one each for near-infrared and near-ultraviolet, making him a heptachromate (whereas we are trichromates). It’s very key that he’s young when he does it, and the hack has a “click OK to accept”-type warning about the potential for permanent neurological changes as a result of the hack, but yeah, he grows up to be awesome at discriminating colors and joins a secret subculture of congenitally-blind people who have performed the same hack to their implants (and meet each other with graffiti that normally sighted people can’t distinguish from the background, like how green on red might not be visible to a red-green colorblind person).

  • Joshua Smith

    Leighann Lord’s question about the VISOR was awesome. I can come up with an answer, though I’m not familiar enough with Star Trek: TNG trivia to know if it fits Geordi, but what if he got the VISOR at a very young age? It’s not so much a question of eyes, but of his brain, which could be accustomed from infancy with dealing with a very wide spectrum, whereas a non-blind person putting on a VISOR would either have a nonsensical mish-mash, or would have to tune it to correspond roughly to the visual spectrum, just shifted up or down.

    The science fiction writer Greg Egan’s most recent story is like this. It’s called “Seventh Sight”, and there’s a kid, blind from birth but with optical implants, who hacks his implants with his smartphone to have five discrete sensing ranges for visible light (instead of the three our cones provide), plus one each for near-infrared and near-ultraviolet, making him a heptachromate (whereas we are trichromates). It’s very key that he’s young when he does it, and the hack has a “click OK to accept”-type warning about the potential for permanent neurological changes as a result of the hack, but yeah, he grows up to be awesome at discriminating colors and joins a secret subculture of congenitally-blind people who have performed the same hack to their implants (and meet each other with graffiti that normally sighted people can’t distinguish from the background, like how green on red might not be visible to a red-green colorblind person).

  • Joshua Smith

    One more thing: What happened to the lightning round? Did Sir William break the bell?

    • startalkradio

      I don’t think the lightning round is gone forever…

      • Joshua Smith

        Well, I was mostly just saying that as a joke, but Cosmic Queries is great with or without the lightning round.

      • Joshua Smith

        Well, I was mostly just saying that as a joke, but Cosmic Queries is great with or without the lightning round.

  • Joshua Smith

    One more thing: What happened to the lightning round? Did Sir William break the bell?

  • Henry

    Regarding the question at the end, where Dr. Tyson says that Warp 10 is unnecessary, assuming that Warp 1 is the speed of light (let’s ignore the actual scaling of the show and just pretend that yes, Warp 1 is c). The reasoning is that at Warp 1, you can get where you want instantaneously, right? So why go faster?

    My argument to this would be that you’re only getting there instantaneously *from your perspective*. To the outside world, you’re still traveling at a measurable speed which takes time. Consider going to Mars. It takes 3 minutes for light from Mars to reach us. That means at the speed of light, an outside observer has to wait three minutes for you to reach Mars, right?

    Consider something farther away. Say, Alpha Centauri, which is roughly 4 light years away. At the speed of light, an outside observer – say, your friends and family back on Earth – have to wait four years for you to reach your destination, and four years for you to come back. The trip may be instantaneous for you, but certainly not for those you leave behind.

    So if the goal of space exploration in Star Trek is not only to get out into the cosmos and explore it, but to come back home to your loved ones, you would ABSOLUTELY want to be able to travel faster than Warp 1 (assuming it equals the speed of light). Even if the scale of the Warp factors were a simple multiplication table, Warp 10 would be an incredibly valuable thing to attain. If your family has to wait 8 years for you to get home from Alpha Centauri at Warp 1, you can cut that wait down to .8 years at Warp 10. The trip is still the same for you, but it’s MUCH faster for those on the outside.

    So no, as much as I love Dr. Tyson, I wouldn’t characterize achieving Warp 10 as a “moon roof” accessory 🙂

  • Jon Cole

    Rest in peace Mr Spock. Leonard Nimoy died today. He certainly did live long and prosper.
    Almost spooky that a Star Trek special was this weeks episode.
    A sad day, but many many fond memories.

  • Robandres

    RIP Leonard Nimoy 🙁

  • Robandres

    RIP Leonard Nimoy 🙁

  • Randy H.

    Agreed. What Dr. Tyson forgot was that the Star Trek Warp drive either does not have or has minimal time dilation effects. So relatively is not at issue and a person travelling at Warp 1 or above perceives time pretty much as someone on a planet.

  • Authopedic
    • Taxil Necrobane

      Yes, and?

  • Jamie Fenderson

    Can we post Cosmic queries on you Google+ page?

    • startalkradio

      Jamie, you can, when we ask for specific questions and give you a hashtag. Otherwise, the best place to post your questions is on the “Questions” tab on http://www.startalkradio.net. That’s the best way to get a producer to see it.

  • Jamie Fenderson

    A cockle is a small, edible, saltwater clam, a mollusc in the family Cardiidae.

  • Jamie Fenderson

    A cockle is a small, edible, saltwater clam, a mollusc in the family Cardiidae.

  • Jamie Fenderson

    Leighann Lord, I would use your transporter energy to cook up a Prime Porterhouse. Also, the Federation does not have cloaking devices as part of a treaty with the Romulans.

  • Authopedic

    It was mentioned in the show in a way that suggested they were unaware that it is a long-established concept, so I linked this information. Thanks, have a great day.

  • blake H

    i always thought han solo just took a shorter more dangerous trade route than everyone else. then i read one of the extended universe books and apparently there is a cluster of black holes near the kessel system which he went through where other smugglers/traders went around, whether thats possible or not it makes sence.

  • Suzanne Studinski

    The transporter has always been the facination for me. If a living being were to be completely cloned each time transported, though, that being could then be “cloned” hundreds or possibly thousands of times. Would the 50th generation of that clone still be as accurate? I am dating myself, but remember making copies of a friend’s tape cassette? Each subsequent generation of the original was weaker.

  • Jesper Holter

    You still need warp 10, because even if no time seems to pass for you, thousands of years pass for everybody else.

  • Andy Van

    Imagine you could witness the electro-magnetic storm that makes up your synapses travel from your old body to the computer without duplication but actually transferring the exact same cluster or electrons or whatever the correct scientific term is from old body to computer to new body on the planet without them dissipating. It would be hard to argue that isn’t you.

You Can Also Listen On

Music in This Episode