www.ditl.org

Its been brought up in so many different threads and we have never really agreed on how they work but I don't think we've ever actually had a thread for it.

1) How do they form matter? Do they dematerialize it and then reform it into what ever you want. If so do you just need some of every available element? To make food do you need something different.

2) What are its limits? Why can it recreate what seems to be a perfect copy of biological matter for food but it cant form some machinery.

3) Are industrial replicators just larger or able to make more advance objects?

4) Since it seems to just be another form of the transporter shouldn't it be able to create anything a transporter can.

This is a matter of debate and, due to writers using them as magic boxes, cannon doesn't really lock it down.

What we do know is that replicators operate at the molecular level and create errors.

Transporters however operate at the quantum level thus enabling them to transport life.

Replicators do have a range of limitations. They can't make certain pieces of tech (some borg implants), food they make is supposed to be a little off, a skilled person can often tell that other objects were replicated by looking at the molecular errors. They are also unable to make a wide range of biological things, for example some replacement body parts and bio-neural gel packs. There are also some materials they can't make such as Latinum and dilithium.

Now there are some cases where replicators, seemingly on their own have just made stuff. Though of course if they're transporter based they could have grabbed materials from the environment. However I believe there are also cannon references to having materials on board that are used with the replicators.

I think a general fannon consensus at least is that the ship has sorts of some biomaterial slurry that the replicators, through something like transporter technolody, turn into food. Waste is then turned back into the slurry.

A range of other materials are cept around for replication for the same reason.

I believe its generally felt that they can shift elements through through fussion/fission or some such. However this would obviously tend to be highly energy intensive.

My opinion on them was that they just needed base elements which they could then reform into anything.

But a problem with that is we have heard talk of an organic replicator stock.

If they just need generic stock I would imagin they can just pick it up at any astroid field.

One way I explain the differences we have seen is different power replicators.

Weak ones need a base stock of ready made replicator stock and can only make basic things.

The next level can make it out of anything but it takes more power.

The last would be industrial which work more like transporters and make very advanced things with very few flaws.

One thing I wondert is, are the replicators conected to the lifesupport system, are they used to remove co2. Is waste recycled through the replicator system.

I would imagin waste has its own replicator system but CO2 would be handled my scrubers.

Teaos wrote:1) How do they form matter? Do they dematerialize it and then reform it into what ever you want. If so do you just need some of every available element? To make food do you need something different.

This appears to be the case - they can't produce stuff out of pure energy, they can only rearrange what they've got to a limited extent.

2) What are its limits? Why can it recreate what seems to be a perfect copy of biological matter for food but it cant form some machinery.

The limitations seem to be based on the complexity of the item in question - vaccines for example seem out of their league, given the number of times weee the E-D hauling them around rather than simply replicating them. They're also incapable of producing Romulan blood, or fancy rainwater. Food and drink also seems to be a problem on occassion - the former apparently tastes different, and replicators are apparently incapable of producing alchohol (when Scotty complained about replicated scotch Data produced a bottle rather than trying to get anything out of the replicator).

3) Are industrial replicators just larger or able to make more advance objects?

Probably a bit of both. Another possibility is that their complexity and volume limitations are the same as a typical replicator, but they're more energy-efficient, to allow for near-continuous operation.

4) Since it seems to just be another form of the transporter shouldn't it be able to create anything a transporter can.

It should be able to, but for some reason it can't. It may be linked to the fact that transporters can usually only retain a pattern in their memory for a limited amount of time.

Food and drink also seems to be a problem on occassion - the former apparently tastes different, and replicators are apparently incapable of producing alchohol (when Scotty complained about replicated scotch Data produced a bottle rather than trying to get anything out of the replicator).

I always got the impression that people were just prejudice against relicator food. Like when you put a fancy label on some budget food people think it tastes better. Since it comes from a replicator they "think" it tastes worse.

This appears to be the case - they can't produce stuff out of pure energy, they can only rearrange what they've got to a limited extent.

But does it have to be specific refined stock or can they just pick up a astroid? The latter would make more sense but canon points to a special replicator stock.

Probably a bit of both. Another possibility is that their complexity and volume limitations are the same as a typical replicator, but they're more energy-efficient, to allow for near-continuous operation.

Kinda like a manifacturing line.

It should be able to, but for some reason it can't. It may be linked to the fact that transporters can usually only retain a pattern in their memory for a limited amount of time.

That would be more of an issue with the computer power than the replicator it self.

CO2 would be handled my scrubers.

Why wouldn't you use the replicator system. You breake down CO2 to C and O. C is used in food replication. O2 is produced so you basicly don't need a constant supplay of it.

Teaos wrote:I always got the impression that people were just prejudice against relicator food. Like when you put a fancy label on some budget food people think it tastes better. Since it comes from a replicator they "think" it tastes worse.

That's a possibility, but Scotty's reaction to the erzat-scotch despite knowing very little of 24th century technology suggests that there's some truth to the claims.

But does it have to be specific refined stock or can they just pick up a astroid? The latter would make more sense but canon points to a special replicator stock.

If they simply used asteroids the replicators would have to be a philosopher's stone to produce all the stuff they get out of it. Since it clear isn't, they must need a stock of the specific elements (and probably molecules) the stuff's made of.

Kinda like a manifacturing line.

Exactly.

That would be more of an issue with the computer power than the replicator it self.

True. I never said it made sense, it's simply how transporters and replicators are seen to work. Since transporters have been used as replicators on occassion (Thomas Riker for example), the problem might be more a case of a mental block, with the Feds not wanting to accept the implications of the transporters "kill and clone" method of operation.

If they simply used asteroids the replicators would have to be a philosopher's stone to produce all the stuff they get out of it. Since it clear isn't, they must need a stock of the specific elements (and probably molecules) the stuff's made of.

Since astroids have pretty much every element in them they could be used to make everything. It just a matter of if the replicator can disassemble them.

I had the impression that replicators needed more than just a tank full of the first twenty elements, but I'm sure I don't have any basis for that other than my gut. Would the replicator be able to synthesize complex molecules from elemental stock? In other words, when you order a steak, can the replicator create the amino acids from an equivalent quantity of the constituent elements, or would it require a stock of the more basic peptides to work from? If the latter is the case, that would preclude stopping at any convenient rock and harvesting as much carbon, oxygen, and hydrogena s you can carry.

I like snoopy's idea of using the replicator system to reclaim carbon dioxide, though I would think that it would be a separate, low-power, continuously operating system.

In other words, when you order a steak, can the replicator create the amino acids from an equivalent quantity of the constituent elements, or would it require a stock of the more basic peptides to work from? If the latter is the case, that would preclude stopping at any convenient rock and harvesting as much carbon, oxygen, and hydrogena s you can carry.

Then how do they get the replicator stock?

How many different types of molecules would they need?

Teaos wrote:Since astroids have pretty much every element in them they could be used to make everything. It just a matter of if the replicator can disassemble them.

Asteroids are most nickle-iron. They may have trace quantities of other stuff, but not the amount needed to run a replicator system that produces mainly organic stuff. There's also the fact that the elements themselves aren't enough - it needs the actual molecules. If it were capable of building anything from base elements we wouldn't see the repeated problems with replicating vaccines.

There you go - vaccines may be a better example than my steak, because they weren't able to be replicated. Let's take a viral vaccine - not a living thing, or cellular, but organic nonetheless. I know this will be opinion only, but is that vaccine non-replicatable because of the complexity of the structure, or because it requires a particular and possibly uncommon group of complex molecules, which molecules (or components of which) may not have been available?

Asteroids are most nickle-iron. They may have trace quantities of other stuff, but not the amount needed to run a replicator system that produces mainly organic stuff. There's also the fact that the elements themselves aren't enough - it needs the actual molecules. If it were capable of building anything from base elements we wouldn't see the repeated problems with replicating vaccines.

Astroids are the left over building blocks of a solar system. Everything on our planet came from astroids.


Vaccines may just be to complex to build. We know replicators can't build very fine complex things.