mmu1 said:
Yes, really.
If you have the ability to disassemble matter all the way down to sub-atomic particles, and then put it back together exactly as it was, you must have already resolved all other issues relating to measurement and positioning, and they're at that point trivial.
You seem to be conflating the problem of reassembling the object with putting it in the right position.
Trek transporters work with a collimated beam of energy and information. All the information about the relative positions of the objects is carried
within the beam. Within the bounds of signal degradation, it doesn't matter where you point the thing - wherever you target it, the object will be reassembled properly.
That, however, does not address the question of targeting the beam. When you're beaming a person onto a planet surface, you can aim just a little high, and be off by a millimeter or two, and nobody'd be the wiser. When you are beaming something so that solid surfaces should be touching, and plasma conduits are precisely aligned, being a little high is not an option. And the farther you are beaming the thing, the more difficult this becomes - angular errors become bigger deals over larger distances.
Basically, a transporter beam is like a plastic airplane model. You put it in a box, and ship it with the instructions - no matter where it goes, the thing can be reassembled at the other end. However, if you don't write the correct street address on the outside of the box, you're in trouble.
This, of course, is all supposing they have "pattern buffers" large enough to hold an entire bridge in one piece in the first place.
