• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Which will come first? Replicator or Holodeck?

Replicator or Holodeck?

  • Replicator

  • Holodeck

Results are only viewable after voting.
Replicators already sort of exist in the form of 3D printers. In theory the Star Trek style could be plausible but would require an enormous amount of computing power to pull off.

Holodecks are a bit more plausible then people give them credit for. Though having tangible items is probably not possible.
 
holodeck:
uses non-existent force fields to accurately simulate a volume of 1000's m^3, in real-time, at the sub-atomic level.

replicator:
converts energy to precisely defined matter.


each of these rely on the ability to handle unfathomable amounts of energy and information with unfathomable speed and accuracy. the amount of energy in 1 gram of matter is what was released by the hiroshima bomb, and i don't even know the terms for the amount of data involved. yotabytes? zetabytes? zzzzzetabytes?

if you think either of these are at all possible, you should not have been allowed to progress beyond elementary school.
 
The Boston Dangler said:
holodeck:
uses non-existent force fields to accurately simulate a volume of 1000's m^3, in real-time, at the sub-atomic level.

replicator:
converts energy to precisely defined matter.


each of these rely on the ability to handle unfathomable amounts of energy and information with unfathomable speed and accuracy. the amount of energy in 1 gram of matter is what was released by the hiroshima bomb, and i don't even know the terms for the amount of data involved. yotabytes? zetabytes? zzzzzetabytes?

if you think either of these are at all possible, you should not have been allowed to progress beyond elementary school.
Click to expand...
I don't know what you were doing in elementary school but I was eating paste and playing soccer. :\
 
The holodeck and replicator are both fantasy land. The more likely simulation technology is something completely neural. It has to be a hell of a lot easier to fool the mind into thinking it inhabits a real, tactile space that doesn't exist, than to physically simulate that space.

And here's a little secret about transporters: every time the ST characters used one they died.
 
Markbnj said:
The holodeck and replicator are both fantasy land. The more likely simulation technology is something completely neural. It has to be a hell of a lot easier to fool the mind into thinking it inhabits a real, tactile space that doesn't exist, than to physically simulate that space.

And here's a little secret about transporters: every time the ST characters used one they died.
Click to expand...

Bingo

Plug into your brain so your brain perceives everything it's sent. It'll be better than a holodeck because you won't be physically moving, but probably more dangerous because it'll require finely tuned electrical signals through your brain. A little miscalculation and you'd be a vegetable
 
Markbnj said:
The holodeck and replicator are both fantasy land. The more likely simulation technology is something completely neural. It has to be a hell of a lot easier to fool the mind into thinking it inhabits a real, tactile space that doesn't exist, than to physically simulate that space.

And here's a little secret about transporters: every time the ST characters used one they died.
Click to expand...

Eh, I'm not so sure of your analysis of the holodeck. They're already doing similar things (related to sex), where the participant wears a 3-D set of goggles. I'd imagine that if there were something like a multi-directional treadmill, sensors watching parts of your body, they could create the illusion of walking around without you actually moving anywhere. The human body is easily fooled into thinking that it's moving; we really don't sense motion and acceleration very well; but rather, pressure and things that our eyes sense. E.g., you can already fool people into thinking that they're on a roller coaster merely by having seats that tilt backward and forward, while projecting a very large image all around them on the walls (and adjusting where the images is to correspond to changes in the seat's angle.)
 
DrPizza said:
Eh, I'm not so sure of your analysis of the holodeck. They're already doing similar things (related to sex), where the participant wears a 3-D set of goggles. I'd imagine that if there were something like a multi-directional treadmill, sensors watching parts of your body, they could create the illusion of walking around without you actually moving anywhere. The human body is easily fooled into thinking that it's moving; we really don't sense motion and acceleration very well; but rather, pressure and things that our eyes sense. E.g., you can already fool people into thinking that they're on a roller coaster merely by having seats that tilt backward and forward, while projecting a very large image all around them on the walls (and adjusting where the images is to correspond to changes in the seat's angle.)
Click to expand...

True, and you can experience that effect right now in commercial flight simulators, or more accessibly, at several different theme park attractions. I don't find that aspect of the holodeck all that farfetched. However, as depicted it goes well beyond that. Simulated objects occupy space, have mass, and momentum (i.e. the scenes with Worf fighting simulated opponents and getting tossed around), as well as physical appearance, smell, taste, etc.
 
Already been done 🙂

hejytezy.jpg
 
Jaskalas said:
We'll probably plug into the brain and give it a virtual reality. Much easier than a holodeck.
Click to expand...

ditto. holodeck for entertainment is retardedly excessive. might be useful for scientific experimentation etc. i think some form of the replicator might happen relatively soon. it's like the holy grail of manufacturing technology. but it wouldn't be anything like the replicator, probably more about using some form of nanoassembly technique that's much more restrictive in its applications.
 
Last edited:
In the chain of survival, food comes before sex so I'd think a replicator. Just picture this, a Walmart or Amazon branded replicator for instant cooked meals satisfying the needs of these folk:

TSnfPrs.jpg


Just so they wouldn't have to traverse the dangerous world.
 
PliotronX said:
In the chain of survival, food comes before sex so I'd think a replicator. Just picture this, a Walmart or Amazon branded replicator for instant cooked meals satisfying the needs of these folk:

TSnfPrs.jpg


Just so they wouldn't have to traverse the dangerous world.
Click to expand...

that has to be staged
 
Replicator, but not Star Trek style. It's conceivable that we could develop sophisticated nano-machines to construct virtually any object from raw materials (as in individual molecules or atoms). At least it wouldn't require a completely new realm of physics like a holodeck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top