Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="tomBitonti" data-source="post: 8982449" data-attributes="member: 13107">I think there is a language / terminology issue here which is causing problems.On the one hand, travel that begins in a location and that reaches a different location generally is required to have transited along some continuous path between the two locations.  That's how everyday motion works, and the requirement is built into everyday language.On the other hand, one can imagine simply disappearing from one location then reappearing at a second, distinct location.In this second case, there are alternate ideas of how that might happen.  For example, Trek transporters, as originally described, convert matter into energy, send the energy through space, then convert the energy back into matter at the destination.  Aside from the difficulty of doing the conversions, this turns into everyday travel, just with energy doing the moving instead of matter.  The energy still follows a continuous path between locations.But, one can envision the disappearance and appearance happening without following a continuous path between the locations.This second case runs into the language problem.  Using "movement" or "travel" to describe the event pulls in the understood requirement of continuous motion.  Saying  "We used teleportation to travel from the dungeon to our safe house" gets into trouble because of the usual meaning of "travel".What is the appropriate terminology for discontinuous motion?This all could lead to a terribly irritating conversation:"So you traveled from the dungeon to the safe house?"No.But you left the dungeon?Yes.And you arrived at your safe house, after leaving the dungeon?Again, yes.But your contend that you did not travel to your save house?That is correct.  I did not.TomB</blockquote>

Verification