Star Trek Replicators

[Elta]

Pats right on this one. They dont really solve everything unless we have a limitless supply of energy on hand to take advantage of it.

The earth is covered by more energy from the sun in 3 hours than humanity uses in one year.


Once humanity has produced enough energy via solar means to run a mass of replicators into making more solar panels etc it's game over for the energy thing.

FTR the "credits" in Star Trek are (As far as the fiction has told us so far) are only used to buy minerals found only on other planets that are used to power ships. Why they cannot be replicated, I don't know.

The general populace of Star Trek Earth find even the idea of money disgusting.

 

[Agent327]

well that quote from captain picard in first contact, i don't get paid, aqquisition of material goods no longer drives us, instead we are motivated by working for the good of humanity

Well, that's propaganda, isn't it?

as for the ferengi well their not in the federation and they are depicted as mostly amoral oppurtunists. can't think of anything to imply romulans are communists if anything the opposite most romulans seem to live in poverty while a minority live in luxury

Communism in practice!

 

[MobBoss]

The earth is covered by more energy from the sun in 3 hours than humanity uses in one year.

So? You still have to have the tech to make harvesting it worthwhile.

If you didnt notice, ships in star trek arent covered in solar panels.

Once humanity has produced enough energy via solar means to run a mass of replicators into making more solar panels etc it's game over for the energy thing.

Ah...how much room are these solar panels going to take?

Like I said, huge advancements in energy collection will have to be made as well to make that plan feasible.

 

[onedreamer]

No, it takes energy to power the process. In Star Trek you dont see replicators in place of the Warp Engines do you?

Ok simple example to make it simple since all this discussion is based on pure fantasy so there is absolutely no need to complicate it. Say I have a hand replicator. This replicator can only replicate small things of course. It works with normal batteries. Let's say with 2 batteries you can use it 10 times. First two uses you replicate batteries, the other 8 uses are free.

 

[onedreamer]

That would lead to some interesting new theories of physics. Replicators as conceived in this example need matter and energy to operate on: they do not make things out of nothing. Hence my worry for the Earth looking like a giant mine shaft if replicating was easy and unregulated enough!

And your theory would lead to some interesting new theory of what is a revolutionary invention. Are you somehow implying that this replicator would consume more energy than it can replicate ? In this case, it's obvious that it's worthless junk.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

Remember the equation E = m*c^2? Replicators would have to require a lot of energy to operate. I doubt all the sunlight that hits earth would be enough to power their widespread usage.


On the other hand, replicators in the show are also used for recycling purposes. There is probably some inefficiency, but this should allow the recovery of most of the energy from various random forms of matter. Garbage, fecal matter, industrial wastes, etc would all be converted into more energy than could be harvested from a nuclear power plant.




The show also shows that some things simply don't replicate well. Perhaps the easiest example is Latinum, whose value comes largely from the fact that replicator engineers just haven't been able to make their machines make the stuff yet.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Pats right on this one. They dont really solve everything unless we have a limitless supply of energy on hand to take advantage of it.

Very true, hence energy being the last and universal good to be acquired. So money would be probably replaced my "energy credits" or something. As to more energy you are entitled to, as richer you are.
The basic mechanisms, advantages and maladies of the market system would still apply. The struggle of social classes, the merciless pressure to beat others on the job market would continue.
This or alternatives to the market system came to rise (which I believe to be quite likely).

But also if we can build replicators, maintaining fusion reactors should be a cakewalk.

 

[MobBoss]

Ok simple example to make it simple since all this discussion is based on pure fantasy so there is absolutely no need to complicate it. Say I have a hand replicator. This replicator can only replicate small things of course. It works with normal batteries. Let's say with 2 batteries you can use it 10 times. First two uses you replicate batteries, the other 8 uses are free.

They didnt even have 'hand replicators' in Star Trek that I knew of. The ones I remember were like the size of a big microwave installed in a wall unit and as such, powered by the ship.

Also, how do you know the batteries you replicated are carrying a charge?

 

[illram]

Maybe without patent protection no one would bother designing a replicator?

 

[Elta]

*So? You still have to have the tech to make harvesting it worthwhile.

If you didnt notice, ships in star trek arent covered in solar panels.



**Ah...how much room are these solar panels going to take?

Like I said, huge advancements in energy collection will have to be made as well to make that plan feasible.

*We do have it, it is simply expensive and the governments of the world are afraid to put in a large amount of investment into the technology because they seem to think that we are headed for 70 or 80% efficiency in my lifetime, when the fact of the matter is we are looking at 50% at best. (By that I man % of sun light turned into energy)

They don't have solar panels because space travel requires a massive amount of energy. - Like I said they mine that mineral that allows them to get so much energy/ that is also unreplicable.


** Assuming 20% efficiency solar panels? (Top of the line present day models) and assuming land only (No space, no ocean). It will take about 856,160 square KM or .57% of the earth's surface.

Factoring in a population of 10 billion, rain/cloud cover, failures etc A very safe bet is we can do it with 5% of the total land surface area. Not much compared to farming.

 

[El_Machinae]

All I know is if a person's economic model means that people would still be starving after the introduction of replicator technology, then there's something fundamentally wrong with people's economic models.

And the people who wasted their time making chocolate cakes would lose to the fellow who immediately set out to build space-borne solar panels. The first person to take advantage of the geometric expansion would 'win'. Unless we changed how property rights worked.

 

[Greizer85]

Remember the equation E = m*c^2? Replicators would have to require a lot of energy to operate. I doubt all the sunlight that hits earth would be enough to power their widespread usage.

In my mind, the replicator isn't an energy-to-matter convertor, at least not primarily. Existing atoms would be used as much as possible, which would require much less energy. Things like making a sandwich out of a rock (pardon the grating pun ) would require the breaking down and reassembling of atoms, sure; things like making a palace out of a mountain, not so much.

Think big, people! We could drag meteors into orbit and fill the near-Earth space with solar panels. Energy would really be the least of our problems imo.

@El_Mac: I personally prefer the taste of chocolate to the taste of space-borne solar panel.

 

[trader/warrior]

scientists have discovered how to convert matter into energy and vice versa

from OP.

You wouldn't need energy. Just an equal amount of matter to the item you wish to replicate. Just recycle everything and the earth wouldn't lose any matter. If there is some sort of energy loss in the replicator I suggest finding a suitable desolate planet and just start consuming the whole thing, or asterods or comets, I guess.

I like to think that the scenario described by the OP would result in a utopic society. I have belief in the goodness of humanity to that extent. Not that it would degrade into a society full of spoiled slobs as some seem to think. There would probably still be such people, but they could rot as they wish as it is no loss to the rest, while the rest of us use our lives to pursue the things that interests us and participate in all the opportunities a society without scarcity or the endless pursuit for money could provide.

There would need to still be some sort of economy to encourage a skilled and educated populace and a government whose main purpose is education and, most importantly in my opinion, science. Even in todays world government stands for a large proportion of science and research spending, and corporations rarely put the main focus on things that could really benefit humanity. So I really do not think there would be any large decrease in innovation, perhaps even an increase.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

from OP.
You wouldn't need energy. Just an equal amount of matter to the item you wish to replicate.

Matter doesn't change all by itself you know. Not even in Star Trek.

Even in todays world government stands for a large proportion of science and research spending, and corporations rarely put the main focus on things that could really benefit humanity. So I really do not think there would be any large decrease in innovation, perhaps even an increase.

Really? Could some informed American confirm this? I really don't know. I just know that US-science is much more privatized than in any other country

 

[warpus]

We have the technology to make a perfect copy of any CD.. and yet CDs are still being sold in stores.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

We have the technology to make a perfect copy of any CD.. and yet CDs are still being sold in stores.

And here one can see the result

 

[warpus]

And here one can see the result

Well yeah, but places that sell CDs aren't out of business yet, even though we've had CD copying technology for a while now.

If the world is still capitalist by the time replicators get invented (assuming that happens), you'd see a lot of restrictions on who can use a replicator, how, etc. There would likely be some sort of a DRM thing going on with replicated items.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Well yeah, but places that sell CDs aren't out of business yet, even though we've had CD copying technology for a while now.

If the world is still capitalist by the time replicators get invented (assuming that happens), you'd see a lot of restrictions on who can use a replicator, how, etc. There would likely be some sort of a DRM thing going on with replicated items.

DRM?
I think the thread's intend is rather a long-term-prediction, when replicators have become widespread and are maybe as normal as a coffee machine (which would surely take a couple of decades - assuming the energy-problem gets solved).
I mean how much more decades will CDs (or any other physical medium) be able to last?

 

[Leonel]

The reason replicators work in Star Trek is that the Federation is essentially an evil socialist communist paradise where they don't use money anymore.

 

[trader/warrior]

Matter doesn't change all by itself you know. Not even in Star Trek.

By "convert matter in to energy and vice versa" I assumed it meant harnessing all the energy in the matter, then using that energy to create new matter with 100% efficiency (e=mc2... right?)

Really? Could some informed American confirm this? I really don't know. I just know that US-science is much more privatized than in any other country

What? only american science counts?

Take for example the pharmaceutical industry where the corporations usually buy licenses to inventions made by universities then develop it into a product.

Now, in this utopia the bonus would be that anyone could improve upon and spread the product instantly. Though there must be regulations of course.