Home

Advertisement

Customize

I should have worn heels -- life at 5'3" - 23rd Century Technology

May. 17th, 2009

11:26 am - 23rd Century Technology

Previous Entry Add to Memories Tell a Friend Next Entry

This is not my original thought - though it IS presented in Jen-speak.  I was either talking to someone earlier this week and can't remember who, or I heard this from a caller who called in during an interview with J.J. Abrams on Fresh Air.  Either way, the question that was postulated has stuck with me for days.

So, there have been a few babies born during the various episodes and movies in the Star Trek universe.  Of all the ones I've seen (and I haven't seen them all, I'm sure, because I have not watched every single spin-off), the birthing scene always has the same huffing and puffing of the mother trying to push the watermelon out of the lemon-sized exit.  (Well, I'm assuming from the huffing and puffing that the aliens had similar object-to-opening size ratio... damn it Jim, I'm a writer not an obgyn!) 

And here's the question... why not just use transporter technology to beam the kid directly from the womb to the doctor's awaiting hands?  Bypass all the huffing and puffing and pushing (and blood and tearing and mucus plugs and all the other stuff they usually don't show on cable TV or IMAX - and really, I don't EVER have to see a birth on IMAX.  Really, really.  That is going a few light years too far.  Birth - in high-def on a 29 Ft screen.  No thank you.  But I digress.)  I mean if Kirk's crew can beam a couple of humpback whales (one of which was pregnant) and however many tons of seawater into the cargo bay of a Klingon ship, then surely a baby (or two), a placenta and some amniotic fluid would be a piece of cake. 

I'm just sayin'.

Comments:

[User Picture]
From:[info]j_cheney
Date:May 17th, 2009 07:17 pm (UTC)
(Link)
It's probably just fashionable to do it that way....beaming is for weaklings.
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:[info]jimvanpelt
Date:May 17th, 2009 07:57 pm (UTC)
(Link)
The transporter has always been a plot-wrecker, which is why it is so often not usable. Between the transporter, the holodeck technology and whatever they use to make any food you want appear on your plate, they should have no problems.

Galaxy Quest made fun of this by actually using the transporter in a smart way (bringing the rock monster on board), although it would have been even quicker and less damaging to just transport the bad guys out.

Not only should babies be transported out, but also tumors or any other bad tissue you'd like to rid yourself of. It's one of the ultimate wish fulfillment pieces of SF imagining.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:[info]biomekanic
Date:May 17th, 2009 09:23 pm (UTC)
(Link)
Niven used it that one in one of his books, written back before there was a complete understanding of the genetic end of aging.

People would transporter out all the accumulated toxins.

IMO, the transporter/replicator technology is an even bigger society changer than a mature nanotech. At least with nanotech you still need materials to make things, with Trek type replicators, you don't.
(Reply) (Parent) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:[info]spencimusprime
Date:May 18th, 2009 03:46 am (UTC)
(Link)
Maybe it's like an epidural, in that a lot of people are like, "No, I'm going to go natural" and then halfway through they say "BEAM THE F*CKER OUT RIGHT NOW!"
(Reply) (Thread)
[User Picture]
From:[info]mcjulie
Date:May 19th, 2009 04:41 pm (UTC)
(Link)
I don't know about next gen births, but the current movie makes it look like their transporter technology wouldn't be precise enough for that.
(Reply) (Thread)

Advertisement

Customize