I understand the difficulty of projecting into the future specific technological advances, but Star Trek, at least Voyager on, does a poor job of looking at current medical trends and advances and projecting them into the future. Modern science is already teaching messanger RNA to act like nano-bots to repair damaged cells and the work in deceiphering the human Genome has broad implications that are not even touched. We could see better medical technology in the next few decades then what they are showing on any of the Star Treks. Not to be harsh but I think some writers need to sit down and start reading more current scientific articles. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
It's important to note that all of the current series are set after world war three and the human race as shown stems from a post nuclear society. It's fair to assume that such a society would have lost a lot of it's technical and medical achievements in the blast. God I sound nerdy Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
It is just a story by authors who do not even watch tv. Why should they? Smoke a few joints, and dream up something, people will eat it up. Ever seen a computer keyboard shoot fireworks? As long as you are enjoying the mediocrity - that is all that matters.
Eric Smith, Welcome And at the other end of the scale, there are things such as controlled synaptic stimulation, transporter Bio-filters, Life form sensing and analysis over great distance and E. M. H. technology. Some people want jam on it ! A close examination of the panels in sickbay of 1701d shows an indicator reading "Medical Insurance Remaining"... But then again, there's a panel in Engineering that has a subsystem "Infinite Improbability Drive", so that just goes to show.
To be fair, the old Star Trek (Capitan Kirk) did talk about genetic enhancements (richardo monteban?) and potrayed fairly well - with speed in thought processes, sensory perception, and enhanced strength. So did DS9 with the doctor's enhancement. The problem with Star Trek and stories like that is that the focus is on drama and not on the science documentaries. So, when telling human drama, it is easy to overlook the then technology infrastructure in place. That is why, Star Trek finds all these new technology and finds a convenient way not to use it in other episodes or that the capability of a system is drastically reduced so as to tell the human drama. It is no different than ordinary action adventure dramas where the hero and only the hero fights all alone, and after he/she is done, the police arrive. A better technology based drama is the two latest series at CBS - CSI and The Agency. I have been involved in crime scene data management and also enemy information management - I can tell you, theirs is done very well. Must have good technical consultants.
Nano-Technology on Star Trek Not very advanced I think I would have to agree with Pollux V. I have long been disappointed with the advances in Nano-Technology as portrayed in Star Trek. For instance the Borg Nano-Probes seem to be fairly realistic in their application, but they are more likely to be near that advanced level in 50 years not in hundreds of years in the future as in Star Trek. Also I thought since you have a template of people sufficient for a biofilter in the transporter system why not use that information to repair someone when they have significant physical damage. You could place them a medical bed hooked to the transporter and just beam the template image of the person into the medical transporter bed. Of course the transporters themselves are dubious but you get the idea. Inconsistent application of the technology and unlikely advances make it kind of cheeze fiction. But it has always been a pretty cheeze show. Science fiction has a lot better stories that never become films. I like a lot of Rudy Ruckers fiction but have never seen it turned into a screen play. Star Trek also ripps off other science fiction quite a bit. The Borg themselves came out after Bruce Sterling invented the Shaper Machinists. The Shaper Machinists are not evil and hive like but have all the other features of the Borg. It is obviously an adaptation of Sterling's work.
Your all nuts. And yes that is my medical opinion. (NOTE: Counselor Coffee is not an actual doctor nor does he have a PHD or any medical knowledge, matter of fact its just best to ignore the idiot and go on with your normal life)
DONE Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I will comply. Quantum resolution data storage. It's just too big. To store everyones quantum data patterrn involves a geometric increase in memory required compared to molecular resolution. So it's usually not possible to filter at this level.
So let's just quit while we're ahead. No more medicine technology! Doctors, stop the presses! Just quit it! We're gonna screw up, theres no chance in hell we'll be succesful, so just SHUT UP AND BECOME LABORERS.
Actually, you can repair physiological damage to a human body. Several years ago, I had a company that did some preliminary research into it to see if the technology is viable at the time. The conclusion was that we did not have sensitive instruments to measure and effect the process. In 15 to 20 years, we will have micro scale optoelectronics advanced enough to modify at stem cell level and program the cells to regenerate for proper repair. At the time, we created a blue print for a Star Trek type medical bed that provides non-intrusive diagnosis and found it will require $500 to $750 million to do such a bed. Most of the money would have gone to programming the neural net and gathering genetic data from 15,000 volunteers. May be some day....
Nanotech is nearly a fountain of youth, Ponce de Leon would be impressed. I have only watched TOS, TNG, the new series(which I think is the most realistic about tech) and a little DS9 and VOY. Star Trek has always taken the best ideas from the science fiction of the past and plagorized it heavily. I find it interesting that sci-fi movies and TV shows are typically decades behind the current trends in sci-fi literature. The ever popular "Star Wars" has strong ties to the swashbuckling sci-fi of the late 20s and 30s. This is actually, in many ways, a good thing for sci-fi literature. The high drama and special effects get young readers interested in the genre, then as they grow older they begin to search for more complex stories and ideas.
First off That is the funniest thing I've heard in a long time. Second, Star Trek is best at explaining the technology they have on the show, they've made some entirely too detailed diagrams of the ships and subsystems. Unfortunately, it'll always be a distant second to Farscape and possibly Babylon 5, based on how much you like that sort of thing. This is the nerdiest thing I've posted in a long time. I think I'll just go back to sleep.
you don't need quantum resolution. Molecular is just fine to tell that someone has their leg cut off.
Been there, done that. I use 3-dimensional sound (technically it is 4-D) and light while teaching meditation for relaxation with good results.
