The issue with the replicator, at least as I’ve read before, is that the food is meant to taste like a certain item but is nutritious aka exactly what the body needs. So you could eat sundaes all day and not be malnourished. Hence Deanna wanting a ‘real’ sundae not a manufactured one to me was her wanting to eat junk food, not something that just looked and tasted like junk food
Personally that wouldn't matter to me. If I could legitimately eat hamburgers whenever I wanted to without the detriments to health involved, and have it taste exactly like, say, a Whopper, and yet still be good for me... well, that would be heaven. Note: obviously I wouldn't just eat nothing but hamburgers, but I think you get my point.
If you think about it, many junk foods trigger physiological responses based on their chemical components. So, a healthy chocolate bar might taste like chocolate but lack any of the physiological impacts that make real chocolate so coveted.
Hm. Maybe. As I understand: In a world where you can get every standardized item you want, hand-crafted stuff get's a new luxury status. Sure you can just go to the replimat and fetch your favorite dish - Or you go to the shop down the road, where a real person, with real skill makes it for you... That sounds like a worthwhile endeavor to me :D
The best explanation to me for why "replicator food tastes off" is every food is identical to the first time you had it. Not just made of the same things, in the same way. It's identical down to molecular arrangement. Once you've had it once, your mind can't help but realize how exactly the same it is, with no chance for deviations. So it becomes bland and background noise instead of delicious. They would probably be better off replicating ingredients to cook with, since the act of prepping and cooking them would introduce change and chaos into the dish
Well, tbf, the writer who came up with that line had no idea of what chatgpt is given that it was nearly 50 years ago. Adding stochastic noise, like you said, and being able to specify the composition of a dish would probably go a long way to fixing the problem. I'm a basic b so I'd probably get really good at it but you know there would be someone tweaking their recipe to the milligram
@@luisostasuc8135 Lolwut 50 years ago was the early 70s ... TNG is from the late 80s/early 90s ... But to your point yes, it's the writers ... Who, I'm getting the sneaking suspicion, had little background in maths, science, computing, or engineering.
That and the pattern is probably overly simple. You can make truly delicious replicator food, it just requires a lot more programming and computer space. You have to simulate how something would turn out if one ingredient was smoked in a certain way or baked at a certain temperature for a certain amount of time and under certain conditions. Most people can't be bothered with that.
I like the way the writers of voyager approached the situation. There was a finite amount of "raw matter" that they could replicate things with. They couldn't go around replicating whatever, they had to ration it out
Yes, but at the same time, replicators are shown to be able to break down and recycle things, as well. This means they should have been able to use virtually anything to replenish their matter supply, even rocks.
I always figured it was a matter of energy. 'Oh no we can't go back ot star base to refuel.' After all it's far easier to open the busard collectors to scoop up material from a nebula you're flying through than to get refined material to fuse, or to do a deep servicing of the fusion reactors so make sure they're not used too much. Which was one of those thigns i saw as voyager doing unambiguously well. 'here we have these things, but use of them is restricted because of the situation.'
@@WardenWolf Maybe not rocks. Rocks are composed of silicates, aka silicon-oxygen molecules, very basically. This is headcanon to be sure, but I dont think Replicators have the ability to change one atom into an entirely other atom, only to rearrange atoms that are available. So unless you want to feed a silicon-based lifeform rocks are probably not what you want to have your food made out of. But yeah, they could probably chop down any old alien tree and get all the organic matter out of that they need.
One aspect I always thought about were the possibilities of replicators that have not been explored in Star Trek. If you had the ability to freely edit every aspect of a food, people would experiment with all kinds of stuff. How about ice cream that tastes like a burger or a drink that tastes like a perfectly cooked wagiu steak. Imagine the most insane combinations of taste, texture and density. Molecular gastronomy of today would look like a beginner's attempt at this.
Along these lines, the thing that I always think about is that a transporter is essentially an immortality device. Assuming your consciousness is not destroyed during the process, the transporter has to reconstruct every one or your atoms which means it has full control of those atoms. Filtering for disease is only a small part, it could literally be programed to repair any and all cell damage, right down to the telomers. Nobody would ever have to die of old age or really anything outside of direct trauma and even a huge portion of that can be addressed in sick bay with similar technology. If we ever get to this point in our evolution, I cannot even begin to imagine what we might accomplish. This is why I prefer the ST universe to SW. It's about US, and our potential. Thanks, Gene.
@@johnreed1268 This is something I thought about before. If a copy of the person is kept every time they transport then, theoretically, if that person were to get sick with an incurable disease/ old then they are transported, a younger, healthier copy of themselves used, and there you are - a healthy person appears on the other end.
@@johnreed1268We know for a fact that your consciousness continues. Because of the episode where Barclay remains aware throughout the transport process. To the point where he actively grabs a person who is trapped in the stream...
Ironically I've heard the same grievances about replicators thrown around towards 3D printing, removing the uniqueness of certain objects and items. But if you have a toy from your childhood and keep it until adulthood, and then lose it, being able to 3D print it or replicate it wouldn't give it the same sentimental value as the original. It may wound capitalism but they can't destroy personal value.
I don't think it would wound capitalism. Oh it may cause a hiccup like the power loam did with weaving. But it may create a new industry. To print something you need the program to tell the machine what to do. For us who are not good at doing that we will turn to those who can. Kind of like web pages. Don't know the program language to have one? Go to a site that provides it. There will be a gap where things will change over, but humans are smart
I think the point Troi is making is that if she orders a chocolate sundae 5 times, she'll get five sundaes all exactly alike, tasting exactly alike. So I think you're right about the imperfections in the recipe that make it distinctive. One of the things you forgot to mention is that the replicator can learn. Like scanning does for 3D printing the replicator can do as well. There was an episode called the Survivors, where Picard beams down with a replicator. The first thing that came to my mind was If it's converting energy to matter it would need a baby nuclear reactor to make a cup of coffee.
I always figured they were to some extent self powered… since they can convert energy to matter and matter to energy, they may have a small internal generator or power source just to maintain the mechanism, but the bulk of materials produced could come from any material feedstock. One pound of lead, can become one pound of steak.
My thought was exactly the same; that it would be the sameness in replicated food that would make it the most different from prepared food. I'm pretty sure that we can't produce perfectly identical food today, for a baseline comparison. Not even precisely controlled processed foods like coca cola or Twinkies could come close to being perfect molecular clones of each other the way replicated food could. Perhaps if Coke perfects what they do to the point of making every can of coke exactly the same to the molecular level, it would taste more artificial than it already is. Going back to replicators: you would think it should be somewhat easy to build a large database of various food/drink variations/imperfections that could be utilized by a simple subroutine capable of introducing variation and imperfection at random, for a more 'realistic' experience. If anything, it's just software problem.
I grew up with the Berman-era shows in the '90s. I read all the technical manuals, I made those model starships with my dad, I designed starships myself. I have such a different relationship with these shows now, and it's kind of bittersweet. One thing I continue to appreciate about Star Trek, naive as it often seems to be, is its notion that humans are good enough that post-scarcity is possible for our species. And even if we achieve post-scarcity, there is still opportunity for all the juicy stuff of life: drama, love, heartbreak, misunderstanding. If Gene Roddenberry was working in wish fulfillment, I think that was it: to make post-scarcity seem possible and exciting and human for those too cynical to even try for it.
I'm reminded of the Tolkien line about how the best stories to hear about are not the best stories to be in. If replicators destroy story telling by eliminating the desire for physical things, wouldn't that be a great story to be in? Maybe boring as hell to hear about, but definitely the kind I want to live out.
@@jwb52z9 so that's a yes you would like to eat poop resequenced into noodles gotcha now I just need the sequencing machine to make those noodles out of my poop for you to eat does Walmart have one?
@@raven4k998 We literally do so even today, or even any other eras tbf. How do you think lands become fertile? Processed matter. Rotten matter, dead matter, fecal matter, etc. They all get processed by nature and turned to nutrients for plants which are then eaten by herbivores which are then eaten by carnivores. Eating noodles made of shit sounds eew but if you realize your food is literally cultivated from dead plants and decaying flesh it shouldn't be a problem to you.
I remember people saying cellphones ruined storytelling but they just didn't know how to adapt their writing to include them. Replicators are the same . The storytelling can be done and the writing will adapt. In reality food water and shelter for everyone may just result in a "Behavioral sink" which would be catastrophic to our species . Time will tell .
The “Culture” book series is set in a genuine post-scarcity society with what are essentially replicators and it still maintains excellent storytelling and drama. Let’s hope modern Star Trek writers take some inspiration from that series.
This is the same claim that's been going on for hundreds of years. The internet would ruin television and the telephone. Television ruined the movies. Movies ruined radio. Radio ruined newspapers. Telephones ruined telegrams. Telegrams ruined letter writing. And so on..... every new technology ruins someone's treasured history. Though all those older technologies still exist, even telegrams. Oddly enough.
@@Kill3rballoon In fairness, all the books in the Culture series take place near the edges of the Culture. Mostly because even the creater of the series thinks everything is boring once you get firmly within the boundaries,
That comparison is a perfect metaphor for our current modern-day lives. “I go to the store and buy my food, already ready to cook. There’s no connection between myself and the animal I’m consuming, no connection between myself and the earth from which I’d have otherwise grown the food”. This is exactly what someone from the 1700’s would say if brought into todays modern existence. Replicators don’t eliminate the challenges, they change them to things we haven’t yet considered to be problems, essentially they eliminate the competition for resources, which would open us up to other endeavors. I’m a fan.
9:00 My thing is: I’m sure they do regulate it, but at multiple points in trek we are shown civilians owning phasers and there not being a question of “where did you get that?”. I think when it at least comes to things like “small arms”; phasers in Star Trek, The federation literally somewhat approves of personal ownership. Especially when you are on some backwater planet with potentially hostile wildlife/ alien factions. Also handheld phasers having there use as a cutting tool and the stun setting would make them be viewed differently then just a modern 9mm handgun. But some manic could just start vaporizing people. Except starfleet is post-scarcity, mental health treatment is accessible by basically anyone and anywhere; and humanity has moved past our vindictive nature we carry today, for the most part, so you don’t see random people start vaporizing people on the street for no reason.
@@momokochama1844 Stunned/unconscious people cannot defend themselves. You could do all sorts of things to violate them and their property while they're helpless and unaware. "Nonlethal" phasers could still be instrumental in lethal assaults. I imagine the Federation's legal system would not treat these weapons dismissively.
I didn't really have a problem with replicators when they were applied to things like food and uncomplicated things which was mostly how I remember them being presented in TNG. They required a big piece of hardware and a lot of power I always imagined. However DS9, as much as I love that series, threw a huge monkey wrench in that method when they introduced self-replicating mines. In order for those self-replicating mines to work they would require replication to be possible with a small emitter or some negligible piece of hardware and very little energy. It would have been more interesting as well as not as lore/immersion-breaking if they had a few cloaked "mine replicator motherships" or something instead of how they did it. In the end it was just used as a plot device, but the implications of automated self-replicating weapons is staggering.
The man-portable replicator issue was brought up in the TNG episode "The Quality of Life". The exocomps were essentially small engineering AI's with micro-replicators on board. The exocomp would use the micro-replicator to both create needed tools and add more computational hardware as needed to solve problems. (This lead the exocomps to eventually add enough capacity that their onboard AI's developed enough sentience to fear death, causing them to stop obeying orders.)
I liked the vehicle replicator from Star Trek: Prodigy and how it performed like a 3D printer to create stuff rather than the usual replicators in Trek that magically conjure up stuff out of thin air.
Sadly, I feel they will lead to the end of us. Evolution, especially cultural, depends upon adversity. Without it, we become those near-useless obese people in the Wall-E movie. My biggest gripe with ST is that the society doesn't make sense - it assumes people will strive for goals, even when they don't have to. Just look at the few remaining primitive cultures on our planet - most are tropical. They live in an 'Eden' where you don't need to do a lot to survive. Replicators, IMO, are the equivalent of putting a McDonalds on every block.
@@marktaylor6553 people who live their lives today where scarcity is no issue to them do not all become obese so let’s disregard that part. Why would an end to adversity lead to “the end of us”? Advance is not some inherent good or need, people happily living their lives doing what they want because there is no need solve some societal issue isn’t a bad thing.
I could be mistaken, but it seems like The Orville handles this fine. As I recall, they have replicator tech and it never interferes with the worldbuilding and storyline in any way. The story takes into account that virtually any material or physical object can be quickly made if I recall correctly.
The orville does the same thing Star Trek does and ignores matter replicator technology, since most Orville episodes center around resource shortages and/or acquiring rare items.
They addressed this issue in The Orville, where a woman from a pre-warp civilization attempts to steal the technology for the ‘matter synthesizer’ on the Orville to ‘help her people evolve’ Her motives were honest and she legitimately wanted to improve life on her planet, but she was caught and stopped, then shown what happened when an earlier Union vessel *DID* share the tech with a society that wasn’t ready…
I don't know what Moore and Behr are squawking about. Season one of DS9 episode Progress is a good showcase of the limitations of replicators, when Kira had to evict that grumpy old bugger so they could use the moon's energy to run industrial replicators.
The biggest problem is the implication of the tech itself and not how they are used. To just create something like Replicators you have to be at the point where matter and energy are 100% figured out to your people. If you can create matter from energy then you should have a near perfect understanding of both. THAT implication is the big one that is just ignored and leads to stupid situations all the time. Trek ships only use Fusion Reactors and Anti-matter Reactors for power... they should be WAY beyond those by the time Replicators and/or Transporters are a viable tech. If you have energy that well figured out, then Shields should be pointless and weapons should be about turning your enemies ships into energy instead of doing damage.
To me, it just seems like Star Trek writers aren't interested in using the full potential of storytelling that replicators can be used for. It seems like they're mostly used as a background technology that makes life for the crewmen very convenient, unless the plot decides otherwise. There's just so much potential that I came up with on the spot, but I don't hear much about it in the Star Trek universe. It's a lot of "okay, it's there, and here's a couple of bits about them," rather than some "but what it....?"
"The replicator is the worst thing." - writers That sounds like the way-too-common 'hot take' that, "Superman is too powerful." The Superman writers have figured out ways to get around that for nearly a century. And so did the Trek writers, "that program isn't in the database" "it's too energy intensive" "the molecule is too complex" or "that last shot took out the EPS grid on deck 23, and the replicators are offline! We're going to have to do the repairs manually." It wouldn't be too tough for replicators to become the S.H.I.E.L.D. Heli-Carriers of the Trek universe and go down with the slightest nudge.
Awesome video as always! I got into resin 3D printing a year ago, and digitally sculpting 3d files 6 months ago. It's really neat! I sculpt scale figures pretty much exclusively. That said, I know they make "denture resin" so I assume they can print teeth. Sounds kinda goofy, but I think dentures are super expensive. Basically you can buy a printer and the resin for like 5 or 10% the cost of a set of teeth. I could really see that helping out the lower income elderly population at some point in the next few years.
I'm a model builder and I've looked at 3D printing as the next step. It can also be used to replace lost parts. I am missing a piece of a model and my son does 3D printing so I'm going to see if he can make it for me. Not sure if it will be cheaper or more expensive. As for the printing I''ve seen pictures where the project wasn't set up right and you end up, in your case, resin thread. That would be me. I think it will open a new industry as well. I can't design an item to be printed so I would need to have access to a library of design. My son has already done "work for hire" and the project took time. It looked good. Back to my first point, model making. How will this end up affecting this area? I've seen some and they look great. And it looks like it is better and easier than my scratch built ones
there already is a sonic device that when placed against your gums will allow teeth to regrow naturally. and if dental associations have their way, you will never see it on the open market.
Replicators would be one of the only ways we would ever be able to have an "utopian" society claimed by ST. Removing the replicators would essentially kill that idea...
In Mr Scott's Guide, it said that the 1701-A (so presumably its earlier versions as well), stored the matter used to synthesize food in its own pattern buffer. I don't remember if it mentioned recycling waste as well, as stated in Discovery.
Mr Scott's Guide is full of interesting details and interesting ideas. But it is also generally categorized as non-canon. Perhaps apocryphal canon, at best.
@@Ishlacorrin Some of the details from this book were used on screen. Some of these gave the book proper credit, others took it for themselves. But even the other beta-canon stuff (other licensed books and products) tend to ignore or replace this paritcular old Trek book with their own preferred versions of canon.
I think they can cleverly play around with what replicators can and can't do. For example, Latinum being very valuable due to replicators being unable to recreate it or Talaxian physiology being too complex like Neelix' lungs. Having them use a tremendous amount of power makes them sometimes not the optimal solution. I think the writers did great with those limitations and with that they don't necessarily break the universe. And I am sure a skilled writer could find a way to incorporate them effectively.
I love replicators, both in regards to real life and storytelling. The fact the writers were so against them is rather depressing, since they have so much potential when used right. The writers honestly sound a lot like all the anti-AI/automation people you see lately. 😮💨
Because they do sound like them even if it wasnt intended. My phone breaks unless it years later i can go the the store and get exactly the same one. Its not a post replicator problem they are having its a post industrial revelution problem. The replacators just remove a few extra steps of going to X location to get item Y
Competent government... I suspect this would be directly related to their level of corporate capture & corruption. E.g. looking at the Ferengi government, marred by officials constantly demanding bribes, perhaps being used as a tool by the most powerful in their society to inhibit competition over whatever resources are still scarce & to create artificial scarcity. Meanwhile, there seems to be relatively little regulation on federation colonies by the larger government, outside of the rare use of eminent domain (Maquis colonies). Don't see much in terms of speech regulation or propaganda (e g. the Ferengi's rules of acquisition & deep-seated belief in a Divine Treasury). Barclay is allowed to get his holo-freak on. All is well.
13:07 - 14:04 I think that replicators are only one component of the post-scarcity post-capitalist society in Star Trek that doesn't use money and that changed values on work or intellectual property rights. I like Rowan J. Coleman's take on this that the economy of the Federation takes some inspiration from anarchism. I mean, copyright is largely a result of capitalism in that it guarantees that I can do profit with my intellectual property and that no one else can steal it, claim it to be their own idea and thus make a profit for themselves. If profit isn't an issue, then copyright only makes sense if you want to control the distribution of your work, for example to prevent any unwanted mistakes to become public like the Doctor's holonovel Photons Be Free because it could lead to a false image of the Voyager crew and to protect the rights of the Doctor over the work as a person. Also, the absence of money and capitalism and thus people being coerced to work because otherwise they're threatened with a worse life without a home and without food (as we are in our society), the pressure for good qualifications would be gone and thus also school grades. Because school primarily isn't meant for education but to prepare us to be the cogs in the capitalist machine, to be good work drones so that capitalist economy can function by corportations accumulating profits. Therefore, I think that schools in Star Trek would be a lot more democratic, like Sudbury Schools, and that going to school isn't mandatory since people wouldn't judge you for not being good at something.
One idea I have is that replicators could exist but require something rare to function, like dilithium crystals for starships and other purposes. They need some kind of raw material - so for example repurposing garbage, or possibly breaking down unusable material from mining and similar operations. This does create issues that unfortunately alter significant aspects of Star Trek, such as the Federation's "economy" - the material could potentially create a supply/demand issue that would feed back into a system of trade. While this isn't unheard-of even in Starfleet-controlled systems, one thing builds on another. It's a ripple effect. Star Trek's economy has never been fully or consistently explained in Federation worlds, and I'm not that smart, but it seems to me that this might create as many problems in-universe as it would solve for the stories. So I'm not sure how viable that is.
The fundamentals of writing from my limited high school reliant knowledge (my college experience was in the sciences, so maybe it's different in more advanced writing), relies heavily on conflict representation and resolution. The difference between a world with replicators vs one without are difficult to even attempt to quantify and trying to wrap your head around the one with replicators when we live in this world is probably about as mind bending as if a writer from the 1600s tried to imagine a world in which you could communicate in real time to someone on the other side of the planet. The number of problems eliminated and those created by that ability would be difficult to imagine without having some experience with them. So it would be unfair to say the writers were being lazy by wishing the replicators were toast, but it would also be absurd to believe that it would eliminate all the problems without creating some new ones of its own. Just as it would be absurd to expect them to have been able to imagine such a world in enough complexity and detail Not to struggle with them. Replicators would be incredible, They could absolutely eliminate so many problems if they were feasible. They could also, of course, create mayhem, easily in the current format of global civilizations. I think they might be an imperative tool for humanity or whatever we are by the time we're culturally evolved enough to be trusted with such a tool. But for now, we have a lot of growing to do as a species, culturally, before we're responsible enough for them - that said - we weren't responsible enough yet for nuclear physics, computers, or most of the things we've cooked up, the technology train just keeps moving, that in mind, we really need to start working on becoming more existentially mature enough as a species to handle the tech and knowledge we're unlocking.
You go “Yum” when talking about recycling urine to drinking water on the ISS… but tap water is crap and urine turned into the water that comes to yout home. Vegetables are crap and rainwater resequenced to eatable food. So yeah… before I even finish watching this video I would say “yes” to one day reaching Star Trek levels of replicators.
Incidentally both the transporters and replicators have a Heisenberg compensator component that without neither would be functional given the computer would not be able to coralate the location of matter in the stream to the pattern held in the buffer.
When I left the military in '94 and re-entered civilian life I learned of a small start up company in Austin called DTM Corp. they developed one of the first 3D printer technologies. I applied for a job and during my interview with the director of service he asked me where I saw this technology in the future, before thinking of the how to answer such a question in a job interview, the Star Trek fan in me didn't hesitate and replied "in the future when the Captain orders a cup of Earl Grey Tea that our company logo will be on the replicator". I thought I had blown the interview at that point but the director stated (after what felt like eternity of pause) "well that is the most futuristic answer anyone has given me to that question, when can tyou start?". 28 years later I'm still with the company and seen us moving closer and closer to that reality with direct metal printers making replacement knees, custom nitinol stints, dental implants and now developing 3d printed bio-tissue. we are not resequencing protiens yet but still have hope to see it in my lifetime.
If the Federation ever lost replicators i imagine theyd lose alot of there technology especially in a timeline like the 32nd century or so in Discovery
Ever heard of STC in Warhammer 40k, essentially replicators only doing one technology but you have different one for any complexes tech, Mankind have become so dependent on them since there is no need to understand hoe the tech is build, losing a STC is losing a technology and even when they have them innovation has stopped!
One of the main problems I encounter so, so many times when I watch videos on Star Trek technology is that so few people out there have read the Star Trek Technical Manuals. Their entire purpose is to be a fountain of information on the tech in Star Trek, almost like the "show bible" used on set to keep the technobabble correct (or at least consistent). Replicators are explained to be set to work at "molecular resolution", i.e. they can accurately reproduce items down to the atomic/molecular scale - with certain limitations. They struggle with things like unstable molecules, radioactive materials, and anything built with a quantum structure to them. They also cannot make ANY living cells or tissues. They are programmed not to make fatal poisons, weapons, and explosives - but I'm sure a clever engineer can get around THAT! (It may be possible to set a replicator to "quantum resolution" like transporters, to get around the quantum structure limitation, but the writers seem deathly opposed to that!) Replicators CAN make most forms of chemical fuel and explosives (not plasma-based variants, but more like gasoline or even military C4) - however, the energy stored in those fuels/explosives must be added in during the replication process. You can't just replicate fuel, then burn the fuel to power the replicators, and thus achieve unlimited power! The laws of thermodynamics are so uncooperative! When replicating food, ESPECIALLY on board Starfleet ships and at other Starfleet facilities (where the crew must look after their physical fitness and health) food and drink have their salt, sugar, and fat levels balanced so they are not especially unhealthy. Vitamins and minerals and other necessary trace elements are commonly added as well. All of this impacts taste and texture, but it is considered necessary to help look after the crew's health. Also, due to the enormous energy and processing power needed to replicate anything in the first place, replicators take advantage of any and all shortcuts that can help to lighten the data processing load. Many various forms of aggregating and averaging and simplifying the complexity of the pattern are used so that less energy and processing power are needed. This also heavily affects both taste and texture. So all the characters that have claimed "real" food tastes better, are correct. Those who say there is no difference have probably eaten replicated food all of their lives and have never experienced the alternative. Or they simply have unsophisticated palates and can't tell the difference. Replicators are capable of making 100% accurate reproductions of food, preserving ALL of the taste and texture and molecular content (both healthy and otherwise), but this requires MUCH more raw energy and processing power, enough that replication would become infeasible if it were done this way all the time. These ARE the early days of food replication, after all! In the future, when more potent energy sources and more powerful computers become available, replicated food will likely taste MUCH better. Though they will probably still balance the salt, sugar, and fat levels to make the food more healthy. So, it won't be perfect, but it will be better than in the 24th Century.
Energy isn't much of an issue though, they have antimatter matter reactions and the Romanulan confined singularities. I always assumed the replicators ran off of the excess power from the warp core. I suppose in homes and in cities/towns there would be a central warp core type of energy creator and since they aren't doing to warp ever that means a ton of energy for people to use.
@@bpdmf2798 Antimatter reactors turn matter into energy, then replicators turn it back into matter. Mass/energy conservation means that even assuming 100% efficiency, replicators would require at least as much antimatter+matter fuel in as matter they put out. That's a lot of fuel for a whole town to be consuming, so i don't think it can just be explained away. Unless they've figured out some way of spontaneously turning plain matter into pure energy, in which case why would they need antimatter?
@@bpdmf2798 You realize that in ships, the matter/antimatter reactor is primarily to make warp plasma and not as a primary power source for most of the ship. Instead, for that, there were arrays of fusion reactors. It's actually a new idea for them to tie the phaser turrets directly into the main warp reactor for additional power in Enterprise. DS-9 didn't even have a matter/antimatter reactor. Even though it was a Cardassian-built station, it was powered by several large fusion reactors near the 'bottom' of the central pillar.
You could explain it away if you say replicators need exponential more energy the heavier the atoms are they need to replicate. Since heavy metals can not be replicated there still would be a need for natural resources but hydrogen, oxygen and carbon is nearly worthless.
Have the replicator de-materialize 500kg of common, no account, find it just about anywhere rock then get 400kg+ of whatever you want? Don't think fuel is that much of a concern even at 20% loss.
The thing with replicators and transporters that I love are the implications. The federation has the technology to copy entire ships, crew included. There's been transporter clones, they can duplicate anything they can pick up with a transporter, on their ships alone. Which, well, means they just chose not to. The only reason they don't make massive fleets of their best ships with the best crews they've ever had is because they actively chose not to. Post scarcity is something that I've seen a few authors wrote around and about incredibly well, and the idea that a nation has the ability to curbstomp everyone around them and not even feel it, and actively choses not to, is a fascinating concept.
I could never help thinking that while Sisko's dad bemoaned the replicator, especially in the context of his restaurant, i do wonder where all his _ingredients_ come from? Are we sure that all those potatoes that Sisko Sr. made junior peel weren't in fact *replicated*? #boycottsiskoscreloekitchen
Man, your videos are really special. Going through alot of health and mental health problems and it's always great when you upload. Your videos are so calming, and logical. Would you be a Vulcan in Star Trek's universe?
I'd always lean towards replicated foods being too similar, too perfect, too exact. You order a sunday, that banana is always in the exact same spot. I actually like how Brave New Worlds's Pike is making a big deal to cook when he can because the individual ingredients may be replicated but its the combination of them that really gives the food a spirit
It would be ridiculously easy to randomize it. And it would be ridiculously easy to program in different kinds. I think the it's not the same was always silly. It's the same and a computer could randomize it with ease.
Though it would be easy to simply have several versions of a given product and select randomly so as to give the impression that there are variations. Indeed, we do this with our video games to increase immersion. Also the randomness could be on a more basic level much as Minecraft creates a lot of variations with each seed according to parameters that limit how far from the expected norm these variations can be. There is no reason to believe that replicated foods would appear consistent and uniform to us.
Surprised you didn’t also mention The Orville very specifically stating that their matter synthesisers were the reason their society could move on, and how reputation replaced currency.
I definitely have that same mentality as the Trekkies you mentioned. I'm all for replicators becoming a thing, even though I admit I rather like manual labour. But I also think that in such a world and time people like me could still choose to do manual labour, we wouldn't have to rely on replicators if we didn't want to. I mean while there are those who use 3D printers to print entire dolls there are still those who use them instead to print buildable models because they enjoy the build process more than just having the figure come out already fully built.
That's the thing. Too many people, especially in the US, want to perpetuate the idea that you have to have suffering and poverty as a threat to your life or no one would do anything.
You could have a farm with a replicator to make all the stuff you need to feed the animals and add nutrients to the soil and create the tools needed to farm. You could also use it for extra food if a harvest is too small or just go mix real foods with replicated foods (grow your vegetables but use replicated meat for example).
In my opinion it boils down to how it’s implemented into the story. During early days of Doctor Who the sixth doctor didn’t have a sonic screwdriver and sonic couldn’t work on certain items such as wood and deadlock seals. The replicators are the same, they have limits on what they can replicate so they’re not entirely world breaking. It just comes down to how they are used in the story overall.
10:55 Well I get why the possibilities can get in the way of storytelling. It solves a lot of problems we would nowadays struggle with. Somone else mentionied cellphones VS telephone booths - the detective doesn't need to find a telephone to call for backup, but just has one ready available. But for all those "problems" the replicator introduces (storytelling wise) it also delivers a lot of new opportunities, I think. And also - I don't see the value aspect either. imagine a society where you can replicate basically all food and all stuff you need (with some limitations for illegal stuff if you want) wouldn't something 'handmade' become value in itself, as it isn't a carbon copy, but an unique craft? Imagine going out to eat - real food, cooked by a talented chef. it doesn't matter if you can have the same from your replicator - as you don't buy the thing itself, but also the art and effort somebody put into it. I think this would generate it's own value.
The one thing ive never heard being replicated is the bacteria good or bad that should accompany food. Giving our gut bacteria is being understood to be its own bodysystem i could see the lack of healthy bacteria in repliciated food being not good for you. But immunue health probably matters little on a tin can in space vs a real biome.
To the question at 10:50 : To quote Capt. Picard in 'Star Trek: First Contact' "Economics of the future are somewhat different. You see money doesn't exist in the 24th century... The acquisition of wealth is no longer the 'driving force' in our lives. We work to better ourselves, and the rest of humanity." The writers are telling a story that takes place in the future, but they can't seem to pull their heads out of this century's greed for long enough to do so. They even wrote that above quoted line, and then contradict themselves and their own stories with the entire: 'Well we don't want greed and money polluting the story (The Frengi are a different story), but we also don't want to have a way to replace it.' It makes no sense at all. The entire reason currency was created, was to act as an 'easier' form of 'the barter system'. If one needs food, for example, it's a lot easier to trade a universally accepted 'good', than it is to trade 'item A' for 'B' for 'C' for 'D' for food. But with replicators, food is just 'taken care of' so currency, is no longer required. And the same goes for most other necessities. I swear the people who watch the show understand it better than the writers of it.
Given their limitations, the Replicators make writing not really harder, only raising the challenge just a little bit. You keep their limitations in mind and make it work for you and suddenly they can become a valuable tool in story writing. HOWEVER! One point sticks out to me: usually when we talk about military equipment, people think about the top state-of-the-art stuff, while the average soldier thinks of the next accident waiting to happen. Or to say it differently: i doubt civilian Replicators are WORSE than Star Fleet, provided the owner of the ship wants good ones and pays extra (at your friendly Ferengi trader).
You laugh, but even without the magic of replicators, a society without poverty and scarcity is absolutely possible. Don't let anyone coerce you into losing that hope.
I agree, building anything you need breaks much of the world. You could even say they can only manage food and keep good stories, since replicators are mainly used for food either way. It would still allow a post-scarcity society in the peace loving and therefore non massive shipbuilding Federation to exist.
In my opinion, the Federation is NOT a post-scarcity society. Perhaps they no longer use money but money is just a way to measure wealth. The Federation does not have unlimited wealth. For instance, what is their best starship, the Enterprise E? How many of those do they have? Why don't they have a limitless number of them?
Replicators do complicate storytelling (though "break the universe" is hyperbole). I wonder how many times a script was written and then someone said "Can't they just replicate X and solve the problem in Act 1?" Ultimately, we live a world of scarcity, and stories often reflect that. Even in Star Trek, however, there will always be some scarcity, it's just no longer of "goods". Locations can be unique to take an easy example. Arguably there is also political power, though maybe they have evolved beyond that. Still, to write stories that resonate with us, it's nice to pretend that watching a baseball game on the holodeck is not as good as being there live and in person.
But, you have to have matter and know how to replicate. Remember when the Maquis stole a few replicators? Or, when the Kazon lusted after Voyager's replicators?
@@nathanieldaiken1064 Right, and that's sort of the key, you have soe stories that integrate the technology, or at least that do not make scarcity of replicable goods a major point of tension for the characters to resolve. That does limit your storytelling, though I tend to think constraints are good especially when they contribute to world building
Locations can't be unique because the characters use faster than light travel, they can travel billions of light years in days, colonizing billions of planets. Or create millions of starbases per star system housing trillions of inhabitants.
I read somewhere that good science fiction requires one leap of technology, after which all things extend logically from it. In Star Trek, that one thing is the matter/antimatter reactor. Once you accept that the amount of power you have at hand is so fantastic that you can literally bend space, permitting effectively FTL travel without violating Einstein's relativity equation, plus a super (super-duper) computer, transporters, inertial dampers, holodecks, transporter systems and lots more. Replicators are just another tech on the list.
You could replicate an army that would dwarf the borg, replicate new eyes for Jordy, real skin for data, and perhaps some actual betazoid skills for Deanna TroI. Tottaly immersion breaking.
it all boils down to the programing to be honest and in the future people don't think of that cuzz they be stupid as fuk i mean really 1 guy wanted to take data apart so that they could make more a race of datas and what s that,... slaves thats what that is. 1 guy said hey lets make slaves yeah... yep dumb as fk
The ferengi have replicators yet still yearn for wealth, the cardassians have it and still want control, the borg most certainly have it yet still crave perfection. Items aren’t the only things in the universe that have value, it simply depends on what it is you seek.
if writters hates replicators, it might be because they are lazy or imaginationless writters. Others wirtters does not complain about it... Maybe because they create stories that does not use traditional "go there, collect/build/find X and WP" storyline.
Replicators work well story-wise as long as they have set limitations. Make replicators need to pull from various different types of matter. You can't replicate food from just raw iron ore, for example. Voyager doling out replicator rations saying that replicated things were a finite resource when cut off from a regular supply chain was good writing.
Replicators plus fusion energy production would be the key technologies enabling a post scarcity society. Advances in science and understanding how to manipulate matter on the subatomic level seem to be the key to making replicators (and eventually transporters) happen. I'm hopeful we will one day achieve this.
replicators aren't necessary for post scarcity, just a bit more automation. Which is good because you couldnt do replicators or teleporters because simply placing all the molecules at the rate they appear would cause enough waste heat to reduce everything to charcoal. Just moves too much mass too quickly
@@travisfoster1071 it’s really one of the least far fetched Star Trek technologies. replicators just work off an advanced application of the real rule we know exists that matter is just a store of energy, we make energy, we have some understanding of the principles of converting energy into matter, it follows our mastery of this will improve. Replicators don’t need unreal physics to come to be like warp drives would.
@@travisfoster1071 how is it the most far fetched? We’ve literally done what replicators do in labs. Create matter using energy. Warp drives break the fundamental laws of physics, as far as we know they are either completely impossible, or require exotic matter, which we have never observed to exist. Teleportation also seemingly breaks the fundamental laws of physics… but sure bro, the tech based on actual physics is the craziest for you😂
The Replicator brings up one of the big challenges for writing fiction about the future, or futurism in general. Or further by extension any quasi post scarcity society. Beyr and Moore, some of my favorite Star Trek writers are also some of the most irreverent regarding the bradberrian secular humanist vision. I appreciate their challenging the philosophy, buy I also wonder if they failed be it was just too hard to write for. You Don't have to have a perfect post scarcity environment, or perfect replicators to serious challenge the status quo of society. If a significant portion of the cost of production is near zero, it becomes much harder to justify menial labor. Automation, makes this contrast more stark. Shifty to a society that subsides living to free people to explore STEM, and other activities, is possibly the most healthy approach. Otherwise, the most cynical extremes of dystopian economic models play out. How much does it make sense to work meaning less jobs when automation and technology have relegated your labors redundant? Worse, still, if the those holding the means of production just cut you out. William Gibson has explored this to its several logical extents. In the book Trekenomics, just using existing GDP trends we would have an effective quasi post scarcity capacity within ~250 years. So, we have to grapple with these issues, at some point. Assuming, we don't collapse before then.
Of course, maybe. It’s easy to bet against the future, as we are wired to be suspicious and fearful. That is in part why I doubt the inevitability or our doom. At least in the short and mid term. Trekkenomics, speaks to the monetary issues. It’s states, and I am summarizing, that in about 200-250 years GDP could globally reach the point where the cost of production for virtually all goods and services, at least related to the first three levels of well being, down to essentially zero. That being food/shelter, health, and education. Meaning, that we typically don’t exploit for profit abundant goods. And if there is enough abundance for all this basic needs, then there is no need to price them for efficient distribution in markets. It’s assuming for trends to hold, but the point is, that it could reach a point where we are faced with a quasi post scarcity society. And coming to terms with that means, I think, we should act as though we have something to actually lose. Not, assume we are doomed anyways.
Even if we could initially just figure out the recycling bit, that would be a huge leap forward. Instead of sending our trash to landfill, imagine if we could split the chemical bonds of an object and separate it into its constituent elements e.g. chuck in an old battery and get out blocks of pure lithium and cobalt etc.
Also, a replicator would have to take a few seconds (at least) to materialize something. If the object has too much or too rapid activity either electrically (like nerves) or molecularly, it might be replicatable but would it work.
Part of me thinks that if replicators are one day invented, they will never be as good as the ones shown in Star Trek. I think some scifi tech just will never be possible, at least not to the level shown in scifi. I hope that makes sense.
Sci-fi of the past promised us things like massive supercomputers, laser rifles, fusion power, and flying jetcars. As technology improved the real world instead gave us tiny supercomputers, plastic assault rifles, lithium batteries, and Tesla electric hybrids.
I think replicators are one of their best technologies and would inspire/allow technologies that would otherwise be impossible. A great example of this in our modern world is how many new technologies are coming about due to 3d printing.
I recall an episode in which a man who was thawed out from the past stated something along the lines of “what is there to do or strive for if not for money?” Which Captain Picard responded to by saying something about the goal being to better oneself, strive to learn more and be at the top of your ability. I have always appreciated that. I took advantage of the freedom I had to get multiple science degrees, learn several new skills, and better my art. But I know many people who would have just rotted in front of the tv all day. So I suspect if we had replicators, and all of our needs met without needing to earn money for it, that a significant portion of the population would just let themselves sink into an unhealthy laziness.
I’d love to see a black mirror type series that explored all the Star Trek technologies to their final conclusions. I mean what would society look like if everyone exploited transporters for every little thing. How are crimes solved if phasers can literally vaporize all human flesh. Can you resurrect someone by transporting them.
The self-replicating minefield set up outside the Bajoran wormhole in DS9 is my biggest replicator issue in the franchise. Where do the mines get the raw material/energy to replicate itself? If there's some superfuel to it, how long could the fuel last?
You hadn't mentioned the mercantile species still using physical currency - Ferengi, etc. That "latinum" (in gold encased form to facilitate handling) is still a scarce commodity and not possible to [feasibly] replicate or counterfeit.
I appreciate the difficulties a technology like this might cause for storytelling, but I think a better attitude would have been to embrace it and explore the implications it would have. That’s a big part of why people watch Star Trek. They’re story opportunities that could only exist in these shows.
I think that the thing with replicator foods is that a certain chef creates a real dish, according to nutitional requirements. and that dish is then scanned and put on file. Example, when tom paris in the pilot episode of voyager orders tomato soup he gets a whole list of variations, not everyones secret recepy, just a list of pre aproved meals. Also in this example we see that he gets annoyed that there issnt just ''plain tomato soup'', that would indicate that what he was used to; jail or his home, wassent the default choice. Therefor we can conclude that civilian replicators are indeed limited. As far as icecream goes, The replicators are like transporters, but a LOT smaller, It only makes sense that they got a lower resolution. where a transporter needs to place brain cells in the exact same place, a replicator doesnt have to be that accurate. so if you order a steak the replicator can miss a seasoning particle, or get connective tissue wrong, essencialy it still tastes the same but its missing that little something (just like modern day vegan replacements). I think thats why there are plenty of bars and restuarants all over the world, and they are plenty visited. Also as seen on DS9, the replimat is less visited then quarks, Id say the replimats owner got chefs that arent UFP aproved, yet aproved enough that they got a buisiness licence (same as quarks) Yet theres definetly a thing to be said for the real deal. Example, when worf and jadzia got married, the bachelor party were given the choice between replicated juice or waiting for the chefs to squeeze the berries, despite being exhausted and dehydrated, they chose to wait a little. As far as economy is conserned, It was said that after first contact men lost their greed and focused on bettering themself, I think its impossible to get into that mindset without experiencing 3rd world war followed by a first contact, But i do think it is possible for humanity to realy bond together and work toward a common goal, but how long this can be maintained is the real question. But if you give everyone free housing, clothes and food, you are taking away that "stick" that forces you to take up in the morning, force feed and go to work. Id say it would make a LOT of very lazy people. Its more of a communists wet dream, plenty of free for everyone, and everyone is hard at work. But as history has shown us, that doesnt work.
I will say this, if replicators could work, and could produce all the things that they are known to produce, then there would be no good excuse for "boring food," because while the first impression would be that they would have like one specific recipe for "chocolate cake," and it would be identically cloned each time it makes a slice, the storage size for a recipe should be relatively trivial, so you would think that it could store dozens, if not hundreds of variations on each recipe, _or_ have some knowledge of how to "improv" on a recipe without completely breaking it, allowing for the same infinite variation that a chef could produce.
The orville had a great episode on this..the girl tried to steal tech not realizing it would kill a society that wasnt ready for it...its the final show in season 3 called future unknown
All a replicator is… is a 3D Printer for molecules. So if you have a energy source and a replicator. You can live ANY WHERE. Middle of Siberia? Antarctica? Deserted island? No problem!
As it's been famously said, capitalism has integrated itself so completely into our culture that it's far easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism. So when you're writing about a post capitalism society, where everyone's needs are met and scarcity is a thing of the past, then you're going to struggle. Because you can't imagine what that kind of world would look like. What kind of struggles and problems they would have because they'd be completely different problems than what you have. Additionally, problems are relative. Your can opener breaking a month after you bought it is a problem and frustration to you. But someone living in a third world country would laugh themselves into tears if you complained about it to them. But that doesn't mean flimsy can openers aren't a problem and it doesn't make your frustration with them invalid. People are always going to have problems and those problems are going to be relative. No matter if there is no scarcity. It's just that post-scarcity problems are going to look as silly to us as that can opener does to someone starving in a third world country. So they don't make good stories for us.
On of the biggest issues with the replicator is going to be power usage. It's going to take a lot of power to replicate anything, much less dinner. Even if all that system is doing is rearranging atoms and molecules that are stored elsewhere, that's going to take a lot of energy as well. Those energy requirements alone, not to mention raw stock requirements if necessary, would pretty much guarantee the continuance of a capitalist system because those needs are going to need to be met.
To meet basic wants and needs, the cost for the energy or raw stock may be minimal, like public drinking fountains today. There's likely be capitalism at some level, but probably not as ubiquitous, again if all basic wants and needs are met. Replicators can make any food and holodecks can provide any experience imaginable (with no risk), so how important would "the real thing" matter to most people? Personally speaking, not a whole lot.
It would be free energy basically, just make it produce anti matter. It should take the exact same amount of energy as normal matter, just inverse the charges of the electrons and protons. They literally had to make inconsistent rules from the writers to not make everything too easy. If you can make fudge Sunday, then really, why could you not make a dilithium crystal? They would write something about complexity or whatever but it's the same essential difficulty if you are turning energy into matter or re-arranging matter at atomic level. You best you can say to increase difficulty of some materials is how large of an atom you are making, that is about it. However if you can make iron,, which require the pressure of very large stars to make, you have the energy requirement to make just about anything. Star Trek is inconsistent on how hard gold is to replicate, on TNG Ferrengi seems to hold it of value while Quark in DS9 called it worthless.
@@scifirealism5943 I am not sure how hard it would be when you could break down atoms like that, but now that I think about it, replicaters are the least as fission and fusion bomb 😄. On point two, at the very least we can agree you really don't want to be able to make anti matter in replicator outside of an area with a perfect vacuum, or every ship replicator is basically a ship's self destruct device.
There was a book called 'Voyage to Yesteryear' about a colony set up on a planet orbiting Alpha Centauri and a ship going to take it over. The colony has thrived and produces all the raw materials it needs to produce the products it requires - early replicators - but they value competency and quality of ones work, you could steal someone's work and claim it as your own but people would know it wasn't yours and not patronize you. Even if real replicators were eventually created people would still value real work such as - art, carving, music, literature, carpentry etc. Things that were made by hand and that people valued. You could still get an authentic cooked meal at a restaurant rather than a replicated one should you desire. I don't see replicators as the downfall of a civilization but the thing that will enable a civilization to prosper, having people do they desire the most without fear of starving.
I'd recommend the novel "Singularity" by Charles Stross to further explore some of the issues that arise when "non-scarcity" equals unlimited availabilty of everything. According to Stross it would not only break a story-telling universe but would disrupt any social and economical norms we are accustomed to today.
When someone explained how a replicator worked to me as a kid, I asked a question that still confounds some people to this day. "So the future economy is even more energy based than it is now?" My brain started putting together war scenarios where energy was at a premium in some places and overabundant in others. There were situations like slave mines on some planets devoted to producing energy ores and fluids to churn the society there forward.
I thibka replicators does not break the story. It just hides an unnecessary things, that could throttle the main story. When you have only 40 minutes, it is better to have this wunderwaffe.
Im glad you went through different implementations as different tech. Real replicators are pure energy to matter conversion. As long as you have a big enough generator or battery make what you want. That said you still need that power so you would still need industry to make enough power to feed everyone. In theory you probably could replicate dilithium and the fuel to run your warp core (with a fancy enough replicator) BUT it would always be at a loss, taking more power to make than it could ever give back. I could be wrong but I dont think replicator efficiency is cannonized anywhere. That plate could still have a cost even after being recycled.
Replicator is an amaizing feature of the Star Treck universe. Writers that dont like it lacks imagination. More episodes should have been devoted to what crazythings one can do with replicators, philospical dilemmas, what happens to us when things lack value etc
The issue with the replicator, at least as I’ve read before, is that the food is meant to taste like a certain item but is nutritious aka exactly what the body needs. So you could eat sundaes all day and not be malnourished. Hence Deanna wanting a ‘real’ sundae not a manufactured one to me was her wanting to eat junk food, not something that just looked and tasted like junk food
Personally that wouldn't matter to me. If I could legitimately eat hamburgers whenever I wanted to without the detriments to health involved, and have it taste exactly like, say, a Whopper, and yet still be good for me... well, that would be heaven.
Note: obviously I wouldn't just eat nothing but hamburgers, but I think you get my point.
Yes, it's probably like the difference between coke and diet coke.
If you think about it, many junk foods trigger physiological responses based on their chemical components. So, a healthy chocolate bar might taste like chocolate but lack any of the physiological impacts that make real chocolate so coveted.
@Atomic Ninja Duck If your idea of a good hamburger is a Whopper, then you’d probably be fine with replicators!
Hm. Maybe. As I understand: In a world where you can get every standardized item you want, hand-crafted stuff get's a new luxury status. Sure you can just go to the replimat and fetch your favorite dish - Or you go to the shop down the road, where a real person, with real skill makes it for you... That sounds like a worthwhile endeavor to me :D
The best explanation to me for why "replicator food tastes off" is every food is identical to the first time you had it. Not just made of the same things, in the same way. It's identical down to molecular arrangement. Once you've had it once, your mind can't help but realize how exactly the same it is, with no chance for deviations. So it becomes bland and background noise instead of delicious. They would probably be better off replicating ingredients to cook with, since the act of prepping and cooking them would introduce change and chaos into the dish
Why would it be identical? If I ask ChatGPT the same thing, I'll get different responses, variations. Adding stochastic inputs is fairly trivial.
Well, tbf, the writer who came up with that line had no idea of what chatgpt is given that it was nearly 50 years ago.
Adding stochastic noise, like you said, and being able to specify the composition of a dish would probably go a long way to fixing the problem. I'm a basic b so I'd probably get really good at it but you know there would be someone tweaking their recipe to the milligram
@@luisostasuc8135 Lolwut 50 years ago was the early 70s ... TNG is from the late 80s/early 90s ... But to your point yes, it's the writers ... Who, I'm getting the sneaking suspicion, had little background in maths, science, computing, or engineering.
That's pretty much what most people do actually its shown in many episodes of the ds9 and tng eras
That and the pattern is probably overly simple. You can make truly delicious replicator food, it just requires a lot more programming and computer space. You have to simulate how something would turn out if one ingredient was smoked in a certain way or baked at a certain temperature for a certain amount of time and under certain conditions. Most people can't be bothered with that.
I like the way the writers of voyager approached the situation. There was a finite amount of "raw matter" that they could replicate things with. They couldn't go around replicating whatever, they had to ration it out
Recycle reduce reuse and close the loop.
"Raw matter" being recycled waste..
Yes, but at the same time, replicators are shown to be able to break down and recycle things, as well. This means they should have been able to use virtually anything to replenish their matter supply, even rocks.
I always figured it was a matter of energy. 'Oh no we can't go back ot star base to refuel.' After all it's far easier to open the busard collectors to scoop up material from a nebula you're flying through than to get refined material to fuse, or to do a deep servicing of the fusion reactors so make sure they're not used too much.
Which was one of those thigns i saw as voyager doing unambiguously well. 'here we have these things, but use of them is restricted because of the situation.'
@@WardenWolf Maybe not rocks. Rocks are composed of silicates, aka silicon-oxygen molecules, very basically. This is headcanon to be sure, but I dont think Replicators have the ability to change one atom into an entirely other atom, only to rearrange atoms that are available. So unless you want to feed a silicon-based lifeform rocks are probably not what you want to have your food made out of.
But yeah, they could probably chop down any old alien tree and get all the organic matter out of that they need.
One aspect I always thought about were the possibilities of replicators that have not been explored in Star Trek. If you had the ability to freely edit every aspect of a food, people would experiment with all kinds of stuff. How about ice cream that tastes like a burger or a drink that tastes like a perfectly cooked wagiu steak.
Imagine the most insane combinations of taste, texture and density.
Molecular gastronomy of today would look like a beginner's attempt at this.
Along these lines, the thing that I always think about is that a transporter is essentially an immortality device. Assuming your consciousness is not destroyed during the process, the transporter has to reconstruct every one or your atoms which means it has full control of those atoms. Filtering for disease is only a small part, it could literally be programed to repair any and all cell damage, right down to the telomers. Nobody would ever have to die of old age or really anything outside of direct trauma and even a huge portion of that can be addressed in sick bay with similar technology. If we ever get to this point in our evolution, I cannot even begin to imagine what we might accomplish. This is why I prefer the ST universe to SW. It's about US, and our potential. Thanks, Gene.
@@johnreed1268 This is something I thought about before. If a copy of the person is kept every time they transport then, theoretically, if that person were to get sick with an incurable disease/ old then they are transported, a younger, healthier copy of themselves used, and there you are - a healthy person appears on the other end.
That's actually a great idea.
@@johnreed1268We know for a fact that your consciousness continues. Because of the episode where Barclay remains aware throughout the transport process. To the point where he actively grabs a person who is trapped in the stream...
@@testpurposes3293they we’re going to do that with Pulaski at Darwin Station but had to use non contaminated hair from her brush.
Ironically I've heard the same grievances about replicators thrown around towards 3D printing, removing the uniqueness of certain objects and items. But if you have a toy from your childhood and keep it until adulthood, and then lose it, being able to 3D print it or replicate it wouldn't give it the same sentimental value as the original. It may wound capitalism but they can't destroy personal value.
Totally on the money, Shawn...no pun intended...or is it? ;)
@@OrangeRiver It's a totally on the money statement for this device that helped Earth get (mostly) off the money!
I don't think it would wound capitalism. Oh it may cause a hiccup like the power loam did with weaving. But it may create a new industry. To print something you need the program to tell the machine what to do. For us who are not good at doing that we will turn to those who can. Kind of like web pages. Don't know the program language to have one? Go to a site that provides it. There will be a gap where things will change over, but humans are smart
Frankly, the industrial age of mass production already got rid of individual uniqueness of the clothing, toys, jewelry ect. that we have.
@@francisdhomer5910 "But it may create a new industry. " Like piratebay has created a new industry. 😉
I think the point Troi is making is that if she orders a chocolate sundae 5 times, she'll get five sundaes all exactly alike, tasting exactly alike. So I think you're right about the imperfections in the recipe that make it distinctive. One of the things you forgot to mention is that the replicator can learn. Like scanning does for 3D printing the replicator can do as well. There was an episode called the Survivors, where Picard beams down with a replicator. The first thing that came to my mind was If it's converting energy to matter it would need a baby nuclear reactor to make a cup of coffee.
I always figured they were to some extent self powered… since they can convert energy to matter and matter to energy, they may have a small internal generator or power source just to maintain the mechanism, but the bulk of materials produced could come from any material feedstock. One pound of lead, can become one pound of steak.
Their power generation tech is insane, their tiny comm badge could power a modern home.
also you can make minor alterations to said recipe and save those
Permanent batteries. Nuclear fusion capacitors.
My thought was exactly the same; that it would be the sameness in replicated food that would make it the most different from prepared food. I'm pretty sure that we can't produce perfectly identical food today, for a baseline comparison. Not even precisely controlled processed foods like coca cola or Twinkies could come close to being perfect molecular clones of each other the way replicated food could. Perhaps if Coke perfects what they do to the point of making every can of coke exactly the same to the molecular level, it would taste more artificial than it already is.
Going back to replicators: you would think it should be somewhat easy to build a large database of various food/drink variations/imperfections that could be utilized by a simple subroutine capable of introducing variation and imperfection at random, for a more 'realistic' experience. If anything, it's just software problem.
I grew up with the Berman-era shows in the '90s. I read all the technical manuals, I made those model starships with my dad, I designed starships myself. I have such a different relationship with these shows now, and it's kind of bittersweet. One thing I continue to appreciate about Star Trek, naive as it often seems to be, is its notion that humans are good enough that post-scarcity is possible for our species. And even if we achieve post-scarcity, there is still opportunity for all the juicy stuff of life: drama, love, heartbreak, misunderstanding. If Gene Roddenberry was working in wish fulfillment, I think that was it: to make post-scarcity seem possible and exciting and human for those too cynical to even try for it.
yes they break the universe because they can make almost everything💀💀
I'm reminded of the Tolkien line about how the best stories to hear about are not the best stories to be in. If replicators destroy story telling by eliminating the desire for physical things, wouldn't that be a great story to be in? Maybe boring as hell to hear about, but definitely the kind I want to live out.
so, what is it resequencing into food from what.... poop?🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@raven4k998 Raw matter is what it is, really, the elements.
@@jwb52z9 so that's a yes you would like to eat poop resequenced into noodles gotcha now I just need the sequencing machine to make those noodles out of my poop for you to eat does Walmart have one?
Eat recycled food. It's good for the environment and ok for you.
@@raven4k998 We literally do so even today, or even any other eras tbf. How do you think lands become fertile? Processed matter. Rotten matter, dead matter, fecal matter, etc. They all get processed by nature and turned to nutrients for plants which are then eaten by herbivores which are then eaten by carnivores.
Eating noodles made of shit sounds eew but if you realize your food is literally cultivated from dead plants and decaying flesh it shouldn't be a problem to you.
I remember people saying cellphones ruined storytelling but they just didn't know how to adapt their writing to include them. Replicators are the same . The storytelling can be done and the writing will adapt. In reality food water and shelter for everyone may just result in a "Behavioral sink" which would be catastrophic to our species . Time will tell .
The drama is having the knowledge of your wants innards and having matter available to make it.🤔
The “Culture” book series is set in a genuine post-scarcity society with what are essentially replicators and it still maintains excellent storytelling and drama. Let’s hope modern Star Trek writers take some inspiration from that series.
This is the same claim that's been going on for hundreds of years.
The internet would ruin television and the telephone.
Television ruined the movies.
Movies ruined radio.
Radio ruined newspapers.
Telephones ruined telegrams.
Telegrams ruined letter writing.
And so on..... every new technology ruins someone's treasured history. Though all those older technologies still exist, even telegrams. Oddly enough.
@@Kill3rballoon In fairness, all the books in the Culture series take place near the edges of the Culture. Mostly because even the creater of the series thinks everything is boring once you get firmly within the boundaries,
People have been saying stuff like this for at least 2500 years.
That comparison is a perfect metaphor for our current modern-day lives. “I go to the store and buy my food, already ready to cook. There’s no connection between myself and the animal I’m consuming, no connection between myself and the earth from which I’d have otherwise grown the food”. This is exactly what someone from the 1700’s would say if brought into todays modern existence.
Replicators don’t eliminate the challenges, they change them to things we haven’t yet considered to be problems, essentially they eliminate the competition for resources, which would open us up to other endeavors. I’m a fan.
9:00
My thing is: I’m sure they do regulate it, but at multiple points in trek we are shown civilians owning phasers and there not being a question of “where did you get that?”.
I think when it at least comes to things like “small arms”; phasers in Star Trek, The federation literally somewhat approves of personal ownership. Especially when you are on some backwater planet with potentially hostile wildlife/ alien factions. Also handheld phasers having there use as a cutting tool and the stun setting would make them be viewed differently then just a modern 9mm handgun. But some manic could just start vaporizing people. Except starfleet is post-scarcity, mental health treatment is accessible by basically anyone and anywhere; and humanity has moved past our vindictive nature we carry today, for the most part, so you don’t see random people start vaporizing people on the street for no reason.
@@X99-h6r Still didn't stop maniacs from acting out, it only stopped those who cared if they died.
I totally agree with everything that Starfighter 1836 just said. It was quite logical.
Bruh US citizens can have high powered rifles and some civilians literally have an entire armory so idk why it's unbelievable for you
according to Technical Manual of the USS Enterprise D civilian handphasers are limited to stun setting. so no fear of vaporising your neighbour
@@momokochama1844 Stunned/unconscious people cannot defend themselves. You could do all sorts of things to violate them and their property while they're helpless and unaware.
"Nonlethal" phasers could still be instrumental in lethal assaults. I imagine the Federation's legal system would not treat these weapons dismissively.
I didn't really have a problem with replicators when they were applied to things like food and uncomplicated things which was mostly how I remember them being presented in TNG. They required a big piece of hardware and a lot of power I always imagined. However DS9, as much as I love that series, threw a huge monkey wrench in that method when they introduced self-replicating mines. In order for those self-replicating mines to work they would require replication to be possible with a small emitter or some negligible piece of hardware and very little energy. It would have been more interesting as well as not as lore/immersion-breaking if they had a few cloaked "mine replicator motherships" or something instead of how they did it. In the end it was just used as a plot device, but the implications of automated self-replicating weapons is staggering.
The man-portable replicator issue was brought up in the TNG episode "The Quality of Life". The exocomps were essentially small engineering AI's with micro-replicators on board. The exocomp would use the micro-replicator to both create needed tools and add more computational hardware as needed to solve problems. (This lead the exocomps to eventually add enough capacity that their onboard AI's developed enough sentience to fear death, causing them to stop obeying orders.)
"what's on the resequencer menu today?" "Beans, greens, potatoes, tomatoes, lambs, rams, hogs, dogs..."
I liked the vehicle replicator from Star Trek: Prodigy and how it performed like a 3D printer to create stuff rather than the usual replicators in Trek that magically conjure up stuff out of thin air.
It isn’t magic…it is using a matter pattern (exactly like transporters use) that is used to convert energy into that pattern.
also its cannon that they use stuff to provide the elements of what ever they are creating.
They seem eminently possible to me, and if we ever get them it will be the ultimate game changer for human civilization.
Sadly, I feel they will lead to the end of us. Evolution, especially cultural, depends upon adversity. Without it, we become those near-useless obese people in the Wall-E movie. My biggest gripe with ST is that the society doesn't make sense - it assumes people will strive for goals, even when they don't have to. Just look at the few remaining primitive cultures on our planet - most are tropical. They live in an 'Eden' where you don't need to do a lot to survive. Replicators, IMO, are the equivalent of putting a McDonalds on every block.
@@marktaylor6553 If you recall...
ua-cam.com/video/YbHtzqCge_8/v-deo.html
It would certainly save the planet and put an end to most wars.
@@marktaylor6553 people who live their lives today where scarcity is no issue to them do not all become obese so let’s disregard that part. Why would an end to adversity lead to “the end of us”? Advance is not some inherent good or need, people happily living their lives doing what they want because there is no need solve some societal issue isn’t a bad thing.
At that point mankind becomes a non-scarcity society. A lot of problems go away with new ones taking their place.
I could be mistaken, but it seems like The Orville handles this fine. As I recall, they have replicator tech and it never interferes with the worldbuilding and storyline in any way. The story takes into account that virtually any material or physical object can be quickly made if I recall correctly.
The orville does the same thing Star Trek does and ignores matter replicator technology, since most Orville episodes center around resource shortages and/or acquiring rare items.
Wooooooooo Hooooooooo! I might not be at work this day of Fri, but fortunately Orange River is still giving us Star Trek for lunch 😁
They addressed this issue in The Orville, where a woman from a pre-warp civilization attempts to steal the technology for the ‘matter synthesizer’ on the Orville to ‘help her people evolve’
Her motives were honest and she legitimately wanted to improve life on her planet, but she was caught and stopped, then shown what happened when an earlier Union vessel *DID* share the tech with a society that wasn’t ready…
I feel like replicators could be a really interesting story telling mechanism if used right
I don't know what Moore and Behr are squawking about. Season one of DS9 episode Progress is a good showcase of the limitations of replicators, when Kira had to evict that grumpy old bugger so they could use the moon's energy to run industrial replicators.
@@claytonberg721 played by the late Bryan Keith.
Voyager had a good story arc based on aliens attacking relentlessly just to get access to replicator tech.
The biggest problem is the implication of the tech itself and not how they are used. To just create something like Replicators you have to be at the point where matter and energy are 100% figured out to your people. If you can create matter from energy then you should have a near perfect understanding of both. THAT implication is the big one that is just ignored and leads to stupid situations all the time.
Trek ships only use Fusion Reactors and Anti-matter Reactors for power... they should be WAY beyond those by the time Replicators and/or Transporters are a viable tech. If you have energy that well figured out, then Shields should be pointless and weapons should be about turning your enemies ships into energy instead of doing damage.
To me, it just seems like Star Trek writers aren't interested in using the full potential of storytelling that replicators can be used for. It seems like they're mostly used as a background technology that makes life for the crewmen very convenient, unless the plot decides otherwise. There's just so much potential that I came up with on the spot, but I don't hear much about it in the Star Trek universe. It's a lot of "okay, it's there, and here's a couple of bits about them," rather than some "but what it....?"
"The replicator is the worst thing." - writers
That sounds like the way-too-common 'hot take' that, "Superman is too powerful." The Superman writers have figured out ways to get around that for nearly a century. And so did the Trek writers, "that program isn't in the database" "it's too energy intensive" "the molecule is too complex" or "that last shot took out the EPS grid on deck 23, and the replicators are offline! We're going to have to do the repairs manually." It wouldn't be too tough for replicators to become the S.H.I.E.L.D. Heli-Carriers of the Trek universe and go down with the slightest nudge.
Awesome video as always! I got into resin 3D printing a year ago, and digitally sculpting 3d files 6 months ago. It's really neat! I sculpt scale figures pretty much exclusively. That said, I know they make "denture resin" so I assume they can print teeth. Sounds kinda goofy, but I think dentures are super expensive. Basically you can buy a printer and the resin for like 5 or 10% the cost of a set of teeth. I could really see that helping out the lower income elderly population at some point in the next few years.
I'm a model builder and I've looked at 3D printing as the next step. It can also be used to replace lost parts. I am missing a piece of a model and my son does 3D printing so I'm going to see if he can make it for me. Not sure if it will be cheaper or more expensive. As for the printing I''ve seen pictures where the project wasn't set up right and you end up, in your case, resin thread. That would be me. I think it will open a new industry as well. I can't design an item to be printed so I would need to have access to a library of design. My son has already done "work for hire" and the project took time. It looked good. Back to my first point, model making. How will this end up affecting this area? I've seen some and they look great. And it looks like it is better and easier than my scratch built ones
there already is a sonic device that when placed against your gums will allow teeth to regrow naturally.
and if dental associations have their way, you will never see it on the open market.
Replicators would be one of the only ways we would ever be able to have an "utopian" society claimed by ST. Removing the replicators would essentially kill that idea...
In Mr Scott's Guide, it said that the 1701-A (so presumably its earlier versions as well), stored the matter used to synthesize food in its own pattern buffer. I don't remember if it mentioned recycling waste as well, as stated in Discovery.
it is stated in the Technical Manual of the USS Enterprise D (ok, it's a little bit older than Disco, but 🤓
Mr Scott's Guide is full of interesting details and interesting ideas.
But it is also generally categorized as non-canon. Perhaps apocryphal canon, at best.
I'm sure it's a retcon, but they make reference to waste recycling/resequencing in Enterprise season 1.
@@pwnmeisterage Everything not put to screen (large or small) is non-canon in Trek, so that includes the many guides and books.
@@Ishlacorrin Some of the details from this book were used on screen. Some of these gave the book proper credit, others took it for themselves. But even the other beta-canon stuff (other licensed books and products) tend to ignore or replace this paritcular old Trek book with their own preferred versions of canon.
@1:19 - Best, most concise intro music of any UA-camr that I watch. You're racking up points, my guy.
I think they can cleverly play around with what replicators can and can't do.
For example, Latinum being very valuable due to replicators being unable to recreate it or Talaxian physiology being too complex like Neelix' lungs.
Having them use a tremendous amount of power makes them sometimes not the optimal solution. I think the writers did great with those limitations and with that they don't necessarily break the universe. And I am sure a skilled writer could find a way to incorporate them effectively.
I love replicators, both in regards to real life and storytelling. The fact the writers were so against them is rather depressing, since they have so much potential when used right. The writers honestly sound a lot like all the anti-AI/automation people you see lately. 😮💨
Because they do sound like them even if it wasnt intended. My phone breaks unless it years later i can go the the store and get exactly the same one.
Its not a post replicator problem they are having its a post industrial revelution problem. The replacators just remove a few extra steps of going to X location to get item Y
🤦
Competent government... I suspect this would be directly related to their level of corporate capture & corruption. E.g. looking at the Ferengi government, marred by officials constantly demanding bribes, perhaps being used as a tool by the most powerful in their society to inhibit competition over whatever resources are still scarce & to create artificial scarcity. Meanwhile, there seems to be relatively little regulation on federation colonies by the larger government, outside of the rare use of eminent domain (Maquis colonies). Don't see much in terms of speech regulation or propaganda (e g. the Ferengi's rules of acquisition & deep-seated belief in a Divine Treasury). Barclay is allowed to get his holo-freak on. All is well.
13:07 - 14:04 I think that replicators are only one component of the post-scarcity post-capitalist society in Star Trek that doesn't use money and that changed values on work or intellectual property rights.
I like Rowan J. Coleman's take on this that the economy of the Federation takes some inspiration from anarchism. I mean, copyright is largely a result of capitalism in that it guarantees that I can do profit with my intellectual property and that no one else can steal it, claim it to be their own idea and thus make a profit for themselves. If profit isn't an issue, then copyright only makes sense if you want to control the distribution of your work, for example to prevent any unwanted mistakes to become public like the Doctor's holonovel Photons Be Free because it could lead to a false image of the Voyager crew and to protect the rights of the Doctor over the work as a person.
Also, the absence of money and capitalism and thus people being coerced to work because otherwise they're threatened with a worse life without a home and without food (as we are in our society), the pressure for good qualifications would be gone and thus also school grades. Because school primarily isn't meant for education but to prepare us to be the cogs in the capitalist machine, to be good work drones so that capitalist economy can function by corportations accumulating profits.
Therefore, I think that schools in Star Trek would be a lot more democratic, like Sudbury Schools, and that going to school isn't mandatory since people wouldn't judge you for not being good at something.
Good work and research on your youtube videos. Factual and entertaining. 👍
Thank you so much!
One idea I have is that replicators could exist but require something rare to function, like dilithium crystals for starships and other purposes. They need some kind of raw material - so for example repurposing garbage, or possibly breaking down unusable material from mining and similar operations. This does create issues that unfortunately alter significant aspects of Star Trek, such as the Federation's "economy" - the material could potentially create a supply/demand issue that would feed back into a system of trade. While this isn't unheard-of even in Starfleet-controlled systems, one thing builds on another. It's a ripple effect. Star Trek's economy has never been fully or consistently explained in Federation worlds, and I'm not that smart, but it seems to me that this might create as many problems in-universe as it would solve for the stories. So I'm not sure how viable that is.
The fundamentals of writing from my limited high school reliant knowledge (my college experience was in the sciences, so maybe it's different in more advanced writing), relies heavily on conflict representation and resolution. The difference between a world with replicators vs one without are difficult to even attempt to quantify and trying to wrap your head around the one with replicators when we live in this world is probably about as mind bending as if a writer from the 1600s tried to imagine a world in which you could communicate in real time to someone on the other side of the planet. The number of problems eliminated and those created by that ability would be difficult to imagine without having some experience with them. So it would be unfair to say the writers were being lazy by wishing the replicators were toast, but it would also be absurd to believe that it would eliminate all the problems without creating some new ones of its own. Just as it would be absurd to expect them to have been able to imagine such a world in enough complexity and detail Not to struggle with them.
Replicators would be incredible, They could absolutely eliminate so many problems if they were feasible. They could also, of course, create mayhem, easily in the current format of global civilizations. I think they might be an imperative tool for humanity or whatever we are by the time we're culturally evolved enough to be trusted with such a tool. But for now, we have a lot of growing to do as a species, culturally, before we're responsible enough for them - that said - we weren't responsible enough yet for nuclear physics, computers, or most of the things we've cooked up, the technology train just keeps moving, that in mind, we really need to start working on becoming more existentially mature enough as a species to handle the tech and knowledge we're unlocking.
You go “Yum” when talking about recycling urine to drinking water on the ISS… but tap water is crap and urine turned into the water that comes to yout home. Vegetables are crap and rainwater resequenced to eatable food. So yeah… before I even finish watching this video I would say “yes” to one day reaching Star Trek levels of replicators.
Great video, it's fun theorizing how a future like this would operate
Incidentally both the transporters and replicators have a Heisenberg compensator component that without neither would be functional given the computer would not be able to coralate the location of matter in the stream to the pattern held in the buffer.
Excellent video essay on replicators.
Thank you Brian!
When I left the military in '94 and re-entered civilian life I learned of a small start up company in Austin called DTM Corp. they developed one of the first 3D printer technologies. I applied for a job and during my interview with the director of service he asked me where I saw this technology in the future, before thinking of the how to answer such a question in a job interview, the Star Trek fan in me didn't hesitate and replied "in the future when the Captain orders a cup of Earl Grey Tea that our company logo will be on the replicator". I thought I had blown the interview at that point but the director stated (after what felt like eternity of pause) "well that is the most futuristic answer anyone has given me to that question, when can tyou start?". 28 years later I'm still with the company and seen us moving closer and closer to that reality with direct metal printers making replacement knees, custom nitinol stints, dental implants and now developing 3d printed bio-tissue. we are not resequencing protiens yet but still have hope to see it in my lifetime.
If the Federation ever lost replicators i imagine theyd lose alot of there technology especially in a timeline like the 32nd century or so in Discovery
Ever heard of STC in Warhammer 40k, essentially replicators only doing one technology but you have different one for any complexes tech, Mankind have become so dependent on them since there is no need to understand hoe the tech is build, losing a STC is losing a technology and even when they have them innovation has stopped!
@@mathieubordeleau150 warhammer is why i thought of commenting this
One of the main problems I encounter so, so many times when I watch videos on Star Trek technology is that so few people out there have read the Star Trek Technical Manuals.
Their entire purpose is to be a fountain of information on the tech in Star Trek, almost like the "show bible" used on set to keep the technobabble correct (or at least consistent).
Replicators are explained to be set to work at "molecular resolution", i.e. they can accurately reproduce items down to the atomic/molecular scale - with certain limitations.
They struggle with things like unstable molecules, radioactive materials, and anything built with a quantum structure to them. They also cannot make ANY living cells or tissues.
They are programmed not to make fatal poisons, weapons, and explosives - but I'm sure a clever engineer can get around THAT!
(It may be possible to set a replicator to "quantum resolution" like transporters, to get around the quantum structure limitation, but the writers seem deathly opposed to that!)
Replicators CAN make most forms of chemical fuel and explosives (not plasma-based variants, but more like gasoline or even military C4) - however, the energy stored in those fuels/explosives must be added in during the replication process. You can't just replicate fuel, then burn the fuel to power the replicators, and thus achieve unlimited power! The laws of thermodynamics are so uncooperative!
When replicating food, ESPECIALLY on board Starfleet ships and at other Starfleet facilities (where the crew must look after their physical fitness and health) food and drink have their salt, sugar, and fat levels balanced so they are not especially unhealthy. Vitamins and minerals and other necessary trace elements are commonly added as well. All of this impacts taste and texture, but it is considered necessary to help look after the crew's health.
Also, due to the enormous energy and processing power needed to replicate anything in the first place, replicators take advantage of any and all shortcuts that can help to lighten the data processing load. Many various forms of aggregating and averaging and simplifying the complexity of the pattern are used so that less energy and processing power are needed. This also heavily affects both taste and texture. So all the characters that have claimed "real" food tastes better, are correct. Those who say there is no difference have probably eaten replicated food all of their lives and have never experienced the alternative. Or they simply have unsophisticated palates and can't tell the difference.
Replicators are capable of making 100% accurate reproductions of food, preserving ALL of the taste and texture and molecular content (both healthy and otherwise), but this requires MUCH more raw energy and processing power, enough that replication would become infeasible if it were done this way all the time. These ARE the early days of food replication, after all!
In the future, when more potent energy sources and more powerful computers become available, replicated food will likely taste MUCH better. Though they will probably still balance the salt, sugar, and fat levels to make the food more healthy. So, it won't be perfect, but it will be better than in the 24th Century.
Epic.
I wonder if u can replicate mayonnaise...
Energy isn't much of an issue though, they have antimatter matter reactions and the Romanulan confined singularities. I always assumed the replicators ran off of the excess power from the warp core. I suppose in homes and in cities/towns there would be a central warp core type of energy creator and since they aren't doing to warp ever that means a ton of energy for people to use.
@@bpdmf2798 Antimatter reactors turn matter into energy, then replicators turn it back into matter. Mass/energy conservation means that even assuming 100% efficiency, replicators would require at least as much antimatter+matter fuel in as matter they put out. That's a lot of fuel for a whole town to be consuming, so i don't think it can just be explained away. Unless they've figured out some way of spontaneously turning plain matter into pure energy, in which case why would they need antimatter?
@@bpdmf2798 You realize that in ships, the matter/antimatter reactor is primarily to make warp plasma and not as a primary power source for most of the ship. Instead, for that, there were arrays of fusion reactors. It's actually a new idea for them to tie the phaser turrets directly into the main warp reactor for additional power in Enterprise. DS-9 didn't even have a matter/antimatter reactor. Even though it was a Cardassian-built station, it was powered by several large fusion reactors near the 'bottom' of the central pillar.
You could explain it away if you say replicators need exponential more energy the heavier the atoms are they need to replicate. Since heavy metals can not be replicated there still would be a need for natural resources but hydrogen, oxygen and carbon is nearly worthless.
Have the replicator de-materialize 500kg of common, no account, find it just about anywhere rock then get 400kg+ of whatever you want? Don't think fuel is that much of a concern even at 20% loss.
I am so glad that I found your channel! I really love what you have to elaborate on as it pertains to Trek!
Thank you so much!
Thank you so much great video live long and prosper🖖🏼
The thing with replicators and transporters that I love are the implications.
The federation has the technology to copy entire ships, crew included. There's been transporter clones, they can duplicate anything they can pick up with a transporter, on their ships alone.
Which, well, means they just chose not to. The only reason they don't make massive fleets of their best ships with the best crews they've ever had is because they actively chose not to.
Post scarcity is something that I've seen a few authors wrote around and about incredibly well, and the idea that a nation has the ability to curbstomp everyone around them and not even feel it, and actively choses not to, is a fascinating concept.
It's my FAVORITE scifi sub genre.
I could never help thinking that while Sisko's dad bemoaned the replicator, especially in the context of his restaurant, i do wonder where all his _ingredients_ come from? Are we sure that all those potatoes that Sisko Sr. made junior peel weren't in fact *replicated*?
#boycottsiskoscreloekitchen
they still have farms my guy and grape fields for wine because some people are still old school.
@@CAOSWOLFIII Indeed an old and retired Starfleet captain owns a vineyard.
Man, your videos are really special. Going through alot of health and mental health problems and it's always great when you upload. Your videos are so calming, and logical. Would you be a Vulcan in Star Trek's universe?
Glad you enjoy my videos! I really appreciate it. Honestly, even if I lived in the Trek universe, I think I'd like to stay human!
I'd always lean towards replicated foods being too similar, too perfect, too exact. You order a sunday, that banana is always in the exact same spot. I actually like how Brave New Worlds's Pike is making a big deal to cook when he can because the individual ingredients may be replicated but its the combination of them that really gives the food a spirit
It would be ridiculously easy to randomize it. And it would be ridiculously easy to program in different kinds. I think the it's not the same was always silly. It's the same and a computer could randomize it with ease.
Though it would be easy to simply have several versions of a given product and select randomly so as to give the impression that there are variations. Indeed, we do this with our video games to increase immersion. Also the randomness could be on a more basic level much as Minecraft creates a lot of variations with each seed according to parameters that limit how far from the expected norm these variations can be. There is no reason to believe that replicated foods would appear consistent and uniform to us.
Surprised you didn’t also mention The Orville very specifically stating that their matter synthesisers were the reason their society could move on, and how reputation replaced currency.
It's called a post scarcity economy
I definitely have that same mentality as the Trekkies you mentioned. I'm all for replicators becoming a thing, even though I admit I rather like manual labour. But I also think that in such a world and time people like me could still choose to do manual labour, we wouldn't have to rely on replicators if we didn't want to. I mean while there are those who use 3D printers to print entire dolls there are still those who use them instead to print buildable models because they enjoy the build process more than just having the figure come out already fully built.
That's the thing. Too many people, especially in the US, want to perpetuate the idea that you have to have suffering and poverty as a threat to your life or no one would do anything.
@@jwb52z9 That, my friend, is the basis of religion. Life is meant to be suffering.
You could have a farm with a replicator to make all the stuff you need to feed the animals and add nutrients to the soil and create the tools needed to farm. You could also use it for extra food if a harvest is too small or just go mix real foods with replicated foods (grow your vegetables but use replicated meat for example).
“I rather like manual labour” bruh
@@bpdmf2798 Indeed. :) Supplement the manual labour aspect with the tech aspect.
20:09 - you won't ever read this, but you have some of the BEST audio so far on the entirety of UA-cam.
In my opinion it boils down to how it’s implemented into the story. During early days of Doctor Who the sixth doctor didn’t have a sonic screwdriver and sonic couldn’t work on certain items such as wood and deadlock seals. The replicators are the same, they have limits on what they can replicate so they’re not entirely world breaking. It just comes down to how they are used in the story overall.
10:55
Well I get why the possibilities can get in the way of storytelling. It solves a lot of problems we would nowadays struggle with. Somone else mentionied cellphones VS telephone booths - the detective doesn't need to find a telephone to call for backup, but just has one ready available.
But for all those "problems" the replicator introduces (storytelling wise) it also delivers a lot of new opportunities, I think.
And also - I don't see the value aspect either. imagine a society where you can replicate basically all food and all stuff you need (with some limitations for illegal stuff if you want) wouldn't something 'handmade' become value in itself, as it isn't a carbon copy, but an unique craft?
Imagine going out to eat - real food, cooked by a talented chef. it doesn't matter if you can have the same from your replicator - as you don't buy the thing itself, but also the art and effort somebody put into it. I think this would generate it's own value.
The one thing ive never heard being replicated is the bacteria good or bad that should accompany food. Giving our gut bacteria is being understood to be its own bodysystem i could see the lack of healthy bacteria in repliciated food being not good for you. But immunue health probably matters little on a tin can in space vs a real biome.
Beautiful point! What is replicated cheese?
@@mrgreatbigmoose frequently derided as not real cheese by other chefs, or even Neelix. But probably better than American Cheese still
To the question at 10:50 :
To quote Capt. Picard in 'Star Trek: First Contact' "Economics of the future are somewhat different. You see money doesn't exist in the 24th century... The acquisition of wealth is no longer the 'driving force' in our lives. We work to better ourselves, and the rest of humanity."
The writers are telling a story that takes place in the future, but they can't seem to pull their heads out of this century's greed for long enough to do so. They even wrote that above quoted line, and then contradict themselves and their own stories with the entire: 'Well we don't want greed and money polluting the story (The Frengi are a different story), but we also don't want to have a way to replace it.' It makes no sense at all.
The entire reason currency was created, was to act as an 'easier' form of 'the barter system'. If one needs food, for example, it's a lot easier to trade a universally accepted 'good', than it is to trade 'item A' for 'B' for 'C' for 'D' for food. But with replicators, food is just 'taken care of' so currency, is no longer required. And the same goes for most other necessities. I swear the people who watch the show understand it better than the writers of it.
Given their limitations, the Replicators make writing not really harder, only raising the challenge just a little bit.
You keep their limitations in mind and make it work for you and suddenly they can become a valuable tool in story writing.
HOWEVER! One point sticks out to me: usually when we talk about military equipment, people think about the top state-of-the-art stuff, while the average soldier thinks of the next accident waiting to happen. Or to say it differently: i doubt civilian Replicators are WORSE than Star Fleet, provided the owner of the ship wants good ones and pays extra (at your friendly Ferengi trader).
You laugh, but even without the magic of replicators, a society without poverty and scarcity is absolutely possible. Don't let anyone coerce you into losing that hope.
Yep.
I agree, building anything you need breaks much of the world. You could even say they can only manage food and keep good stories, since replicators are mainly used for food either way. It would still allow a post-scarcity society in the peace loving and therefore non massive shipbuilding Federation to exist.
Lol nice.
In my opinion, the Federation is NOT a post-scarcity society. Perhaps they no longer use money but money is just a way to measure wealth. The Federation does not have unlimited wealth. For instance, what is their best starship, the Enterprise E? How many of those do they have? Why don't they have a limitless number of them?
Only just found your channel. not seen anybody else do in depth looks like this, I like.
Welcome!
Replicators do complicate storytelling (though "break the universe" is hyperbole). I wonder how many times a script was written and then someone said "Can't they just replicate X and solve the problem in Act 1?" Ultimately, we live a world of scarcity, and stories often reflect that. Even in Star Trek, however, there will always be some scarcity, it's just no longer of "goods". Locations can be unique to take an easy example. Arguably there is also political power, though maybe they have evolved beyond that. Still, to write stories that resonate with us, it's nice to pretend that watching a baseball game on the holodeck is not as good as being there live and in person.
But, you have to have matter and know how to replicate. Remember when the Maquis stole a few replicators? Or, when the Kazon lusted after Voyager's replicators?
@@nathanieldaiken1064 Right, and that's sort of the key, you have soe stories that integrate the technology, or at least that do not make scarcity of replicable goods a major point of tension for the characters to resolve. That does limit your storytelling, though I tend to think constraints are good especially when they contribute to world building
Ron Moore himself hated the replicators so the writers room ignored it.
Locations can't be unique because the characters use faster than light travel, they can travel billions of light years in days, colonizing billions of planets.
Or create millions of starbases per star system housing trillions of inhabitants.
I read somewhere that good science fiction requires one leap of technology, after which all things extend logically from it. In Star Trek, that one thing is the matter/antimatter reactor. Once you accept that the amount of power you have at hand is so fantastic that you can literally bend space, permitting effectively FTL travel without violating Einstein's relativity equation, plus a super (super-duper) computer, transporters, inertial dampers, holodecks, transporter systems and lots more. Replicators are just another tech on the list.
You could replicate an army that would dwarf the borg, replicate new eyes for Jordy, real skin for data, and perhaps some actual betazoid skills for Deanna TroI.
Tottaly immersion breaking.
it all boils down to the programing to be honest and in the future people don't think of that cuzz they be stupid as fuk i mean really 1 guy wanted to take data apart so that they could make more a race of datas and what s that,... slaves thats what that is. 1 guy said hey lets make slaves yeah... yep dumb as fk
NO! Replicators were used in The Jetsons, The Flintstones (deleted scene) and Back To The Future Part 2.
There's a reason so many things can't be replicated... Story telling!
The ferengi have replicators yet still yearn for wealth, the cardassians have it and still want control, the borg most certainly have it yet still crave perfection. Items aren’t the only things in the universe that have value, it simply depends on what it is you seek.
if writters hates replicators, it might be because they are lazy or imaginationless writters.
Others wirtters does not complain about it... Maybe because they create stories that does not use traditional "go there, collect/build/find X and WP" storyline.
Replicators work well story-wise as long as they have set limitations. Make replicators need to pull from various different types of matter. You can't replicate food from just raw iron ore, for example. Voyager doling out replicator rations saying that replicated things were a finite resource when cut off from a regular supply chain was good writing.
Replicators plus fusion energy production would be the key technologies enabling a post scarcity society. Advances in science and understanding how to manipulate matter on the subatomic level seem to be the key to making replicators (and eventually transporters) happen. I'm hopeful we will one day achieve this.
replicators aren't necessary for post scarcity, just a bit more automation. Which is good because you couldnt do replicators or teleporters because simply placing all the molecules at the rate they appear would cause enough waste heat to reduce everything to charcoal. Just moves too much mass too quickly
Only in a Sci fi writers mind.... it will never happen.
@@travisfoster1071 it’s really one of the least far fetched Star Trek technologies. replicators just work off an advanced application of the real rule we know exists that matter is just a store of energy, we make energy, we have some understanding of the principles of converting energy into matter, it follows our mastery of this will improve. Replicators don’t need unreal physics to come to be like warp drives would.
@@Emperorhirohito19272 most far fetched.... don't try to justify Roddenberry magic solutions. I hate that.
@@travisfoster1071 how is it the most far fetched? We’ve literally done what replicators do in labs. Create matter using energy. Warp drives break the fundamental laws of physics, as far as we know they are either completely impossible, or require exotic matter, which we have never observed to exist. Teleportation also seemingly breaks the fundamental laws of physics… but sure bro, the tech based on actual physics is the craziest for you😂
This is VERY well put together. Great video !!
Thank you!
The Replicator brings up one of the big challenges for writing fiction about the future, or futurism in general. Or further by extension any quasi post scarcity society. Beyr and Moore, some of my favorite Star Trek writers are also some of the most irreverent regarding the bradberrian secular humanist vision. I appreciate their challenging the philosophy, buy I also wonder if they failed be it was just too hard to write for. You Don't have to have a perfect post scarcity environment, or perfect replicators to serious challenge the status quo of society. If a significant portion of the cost of production is near zero, it becomes much harder to justify menial labor. Automation, makes this contrast more stark. Shifty to a society that subsides living to free people to explore STEM, and other activities, is possibly the most healthy approach. Otherwise, the most cynical extremes of dystopian economic models play out. How much does it make sense to work meaning less jobs when automation and technology have relegated your labors redundant? Worse, still, if the those holding the means of production just cut you out. William Gibson has explored this to its several logical extents. In the book Trekenomics, just using existing GDP trends we would have an effective quasi post scarcity capacity within ~250 years. So, we have to grapple with these issues, at some point. Assuming, we don't collapse before then.
Unfortunately, I believe society and the economy will need to collapse if we are ever going to hope to transcend the misguided need for monetization
Of course, maybe. It’s easy to bet against the future, as we are wired to be suspicious and fearful. That is in part why I doubt the inevitability or our doom. At least in the short and mid term. Trekkenomics, speaks to the monetary issues. It’s states, and I am summarizing, that in about 200-250 years GDP could globally reach the point where the cost of production for virtually all goods and services, at least related to the first three levels of well being, down to essentially zero. That being food/shelter, health, and education. Meaning, that we typically don’t exploit for profit abundant goods. And if there is enough abundance for all this basic needs, then there is no need to price them for efficient distribution in markets. It’s assuming for trends to hold, but the point is, that it could reach a point where we are faced with a quasi post scarcity society. And coming to terms with that means, I think, we should act as though we have something to actually lose. Not, assume we are doomed anyways.
Even if we could initially just figure out the recycling bit, that would be a huge leap forward. Instead of sending our trash to landfill, imagine if we could split the chemical bonds of an object and separate it into its constituent elements e.g. chuck in an old battery and get out blocks of pure lithium and cobalt etc.
You need a solid massive block of carbon
Don't take any food off the ship
Recycle crew that pass away
Also, a replicator would have to take a few seconds (at least) to materialize something. If the object has too much or too rapid activity either electrically (like nerves) or molecularly, it might be replicatable but would it work.
Part of me thinks that if replicators are one day invented, they will never be as good as the ones shown in Star Trek. I think some scifi tech just will never be possible, at least not to the level shown in scifi. I hope that makes sense.
Sci-fi of the past promised us things like massive supercomputers, laser rifles, fusion power, and flying jetcars.
As technology improved the real world instead gave us tiny supercomputers, plastic assault rifles, lithium batteries, and Tesla electric hybrids.
The point of the replicators is that they make the Federation a post scarcity society and if you remove them it won't be
I think replicators are one of their best technologies and would inspire/allow technologies that would otherwise be impossible. A great example of this in our modern world is how many new technologies are coming about due to 3d printing.
I recall an episode in which a man who was thawed out from the past stated something along the lines of “what is there to do or strive for if not for money?” Which Captain Picard responded to by saying something about the goal being to better oneself, strive to learn more and be at the top of your ability.
I have always appreciated that. I took advantage of the freedom I had to get multiple science degrees, learn several new skills, and better my art. But I know many people who would have just rotted in front of the tv all day.
So I suspect if we had replicators, and all of our needs met without needing to earn money for it, that a significant portion of the population would just let themselves sink into an unhealthy laziness.
A replicator and a holodeck I would be happy that's all I want in my life
I’d love to see a black mirror type series that explored all the Star Trek technologies to their final conclusions. I mean what would society look like if everyone exploited transporters for every little thing. How are crimes solved if phasers can literally vaporize all human flesh. Can you resurrect someone by transporting them.
Epic.
The self-replicating minefield set up outside the Bajoran wormhole in DS9 is my biggest replicator issue in the franchise. Where do the mines get the raw material/energy to replicate itself? If there's some superfuel to it, how long could the fuel last?
just watch out for Reggie going to the holodeck and telling it how to build a brain interface
In context of Startrek replicators are a must. The cost of using them for all will not be viable. It will not break the universe.
You hadn't mentioned the mercantile species still using physical currency - Ferengi, etc. That "latinum" (in gold encased form to facilitate handling) is still a scarce commodity and not possible to [feasibly] replicate or counterfeit.
I remember how the Kazon was surprised to find the replicators in enterprise
The Star Trek toilets fed into the Food replicators….I know the physics
I appreciate the difficulties a technology like this might cause for storytelling, but I think a better attitude would have been to embrace it and explore the implications it would have. That’s a big part of why people watch Star Trek. They’re story opportunities that could only exist in these shows.
I think that the thing with replicator foods is that a certain chef creates a real dish, according to nutitional requirements. and that dish is then scanned and put on file.
Example, when tom paris in the pilot episode of voyager orders tomato soup he gets a whole list of variations, not everyones secret recepy, just a list of pre aproved meals.
Also in this example we see that he gets annoyed that there issnt just ''plain tomato soup'', that would indicate that what he was used to; jail or his home, wassent the default choice. Therefor we can conclude that civilian replicators are indeed limited.
As far as icecream goes, The replicators are like transporters, but a LOT smaller, It only makes sense that they got a lower resolution. where a transporter needs to place brain cells in the exact same place, a replicator doesnt have to be that accurate. so if you order a steak the replicator can miss a seasoning particle, or get connective tissue wrong, essencialy it still tastes the same but its missing that little something (just like modern day vegan replacements). I think thats why there are plenty of bars and restuarants all over the world, and they are plenty visited.
Also as seen on DS9, the replimat is less visited then quarks, Id say the replimats owner got chefs that arent UFP aproved, yet aproved enough that they got a buisiness licence (same as quarks)
Yet theres definetly a thing to be said for the real deal.
Example, when worf and jadzia got married, the bachelor party were given the choice between replicated juice or waiting for the chefs to squeeze the berries, despite being exhausted and dehydrated, they chose to wait a little.
As far as economy is conserned, It was said that after first contact men lost their greed and focused on bettering themself,
I think its impossible to get into that mindset without experiencing 3rd world war followed by a first contact, But i do think it is possible for humanity to realy bond together and work toward a common goal, but how long this can be maintained is the real question.
But if you give everyone free housing, clothes and food, you are taking away that "stick" that forces you to take up in the morning, force feed and go to work. Id say it would make a LOT of very lazy people. Its more of a communists wet dream, plenty of free for everyone, and everyone is hard at work. But as history has shown us, that doesnt work.
I will say this, if replicators could work, and could produce all the things that they are known to produce, then there would be no good excuse for "boring food," because while the first impression would be that they would have like one specific recipe for "chocolate cake," and it would be identically cloned each time it makes a slice, the storage size for a recipe should be relatively trivial, so you would think that it could store dozens, if not hundreds of variations on each recipe, _or_ have some knowledge of how to "improv" on a recipe without completely breaking it, allowing for the same infinite variation that a chef could produce.
Thanks for your work and the vidéo...and nice on the 37k sub . Soon a million
Haha, thanks! We take the small milestones when we can
@@OrangeRiver 146k views on this vids and 1.182 comments... nice very nice
0:45 I don't remember this scene. From which episode is this?
First episode of TNG it looks like
@@rancidrance875 It's logical - Riker is without a beard.
Stng s1 e1 encounter at far point.
The orville had a great episode on this..the girl tried to steal tech not realizing it would kill a society that wasnt ready for it...its the final show in season 3 called future unknown
can't wait for that united earth video ;) great content as always, cheers!
Thank you Nitero!
All a replicator is… is a 3D Printer for molecules. So if you have a energy source and a replicator. You can live ANY WHERE. Middle of Siberia? Antarctica? Deserted island? No problem!
As it's been famously said, capitalism has integrated itself so completely into our culture that it's far easier to imagine the end of the world than the end of capitalism. So when you're writing about a post capitalism society, where everyone's needs are met and scarcity is a thing of the past, then you're going to struggle. Because you can't imagine what that kind of world would look like. What kind of struggles and problems they would have because they'd be completely different problems than what you have. Additionally, problems are relative. Your can opener breaking a month after you bought it is a problem and frustration to you. But someone living in a third world country would laugh themselves into tears if you complained about it to them. But that doesn't mean flimsy can openers aren't a problem and it doesn't make your frustration with them invalid. People are always going to have problems and those problems are going to be relative. No matter if there is no scarcity. It's just that post-scarcity problems are going to look as silly to us as that can opener does to someone starving in a third world country. So they don't make good stories for us.
On of the biggest issues with the replicator is going to be power usage. It's going to take a lot of power to replicate anything, much less dinner. Even if all that system is doing is rearranging atoms and molecules that are stored elsewhere, that's going to take a lot of energy as well.
Those energy requirements alone, not to mention raw stock requirements if necessary, would pretty much guarantee the continuance of a capitalist system because those needs are going to need to be met.
To meet basic wants and needs, the cost for the energy or raw stock may be minimal, like public drinking fountains today. There's likely be capitalism at some level, but probably not as ubiquitous, again if all basic wants and needs are met. Replicators can make any food and holodecks can provide any experience imaginable (with no risk), so how important would "the real thing" matter to most people? Personally speaking, not a whole lot.
It would be free energy basically, just make it produce anti matter. It should take the exact same amount of energy as normal matter, just inverse the charges of the electrons and protons.
They literally had to make inconsistent rules from the writers to not make everything too easy. If you can make fudge Sunday, then really, why could you not make a dilithium crystal? They would write something about complexity or whatever but it's the same essential difficulty if you are turning energy into matter or re-arranging matter at atomic level. You best you can say to increase difficulty of some materials is how large of an atom you are making, that is about it. However if you can make iron,, which require the pressure of very large stars to make, you have the energy requirement to make just about anything. Star Trek is inconsistent on how hard gold is to replicate, on TNG Ferrengi seems to hold it of value while Quark in DS9 called it worthless.
Exactly.
There are other properties besides electric charge you'd have to flip to change matter into antimatter.
2. Replicator can't make Antimatter
@@scifirealism5943 I am not sure how hard it would be when you could break down atoms like that, but now that I think about it, replicaters are the least as fission and fusion bomb 😄.
On point two, at the very least we can agree you really don't want to be able to make anti matter in replicator outside of an area with a perfect vacuum, or every ship replicator is basically a ship's self destruct device.
@EarthenDam thanks for the response.
It
According to the Star Trek technical manual, they use quantum charge reversal devices to produce antimatter
There was a book called 'Voyage to Yesteryear' about a colony set up on a planet orbiting Alpha Centauri and a ship going to take it over. The colony has thrived and produces all the raw materials it needs to produce the products it requires - early replicators - but they value competency and quality of ones work, you could steal someone's work and claim it as your own but people would know it wasn't yours and not patronize you. Even if real replicators were eventually created people would still value real work such as - art, carving, music, literature, carpentry etc. Things that were made by hand and that people valued. You could still get an authentic cooked meal at a restaurant rather than a replicated one should you desire. I don't see replicators as the downfall of a civilization but the thing that will enable a civilization to prosper, having people do they desire the most without fear of starving.
Omg I bought that book to read about post scarcity!
I'd recommend the novel "Singularity" by Charles Stross to further explore some of the issues that arise when "non-scarcity" equals unlimited availabilty of everything. According to Stross it would not only break a story-telling universe but would disrupt any social and economical norms we are accustomed to today.
I'll read.
When someone explained how a replicator worked to me as a kid, I asked a question that still confounds some people to this day.
"So the future economy is even more energy based than it is now?"
My brain started putting together war scenarios where energy was at a premium in some places and overabundant in others. There were situations like slave mines on some planets devoted to producing energy ores and fluids to churn the society there forward.
I thibka replicators does not break the story. It just hides an unnecessary things, that could throttle the main story. When you have only 40 minutes, it is better to have this wunderwaffe.
Im glad you went through different implementations as different tech. Real replicators are pure energy to matter conversion. As long as you have a big enough generator or battery make what you want. That said you still need that power so you would still need industry to make enough power to feed everyone. In theory you probably could replicate dilithium and the fuel to run your warp core (with a fancy enough replicator) BUT it would always be at a loss, taking more power to make than it could ever give back.
I could be wrong but I dont think replicator efficiency is cannonized anywhere. That plate could still have a cost even after being recycled.
Replicator is an amaizing feature of the Star Treck universe. Writers that dont like it lacks imagination. More episodes should have been devoted to what crazythings one can do with replicators, philospical dilemmas, what happens to us when things lack value etc
Yep.