Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site sphinx.UChicago.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!gargoyle!sphinx!her3
From: her3@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP (Benjamin Andrew Herman)
Newsgroups: net.startrek
Subject: Re: Transporters:a question
Message-ID: <375@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 29-Apr-85 21:48:16 EDT
Article-I.D.: sphinx.375
Posted: Mon Apr 29 21:48:16 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 30-Apr-85 07:43:49 EDT
References: <438@nmtvax.UUCP>
Organization: U. Chicago - Computation Center
Lines: 20

A few nights ago, I watched "A Piece of the Action" with a friend. We
began wondering: when the Enterprise beams one of the crime bosses over
to where Kirk is, why doesn't the phone that the crime boss is holding
beam with him?
 
Our best explanation was that things that are attached to other things do
not beam up.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Oh boy .... lets just call these tranporter inconsistencies numerous!!!
Think about what you said!! this wold mean in the same episode when kirk and
Spock beam down there phasers wold be left behind.
   Think of the numerous episodes where someone grabs onto someone else and getts
beamed along.... If you really want an explaination < which I have never found a satisfying one> try this-- 
    the transporter is a beam operation if a narrow beam hits an object they that object can be beamed aboard (ie. the beam expands itself to include only the extremities of the beamed object). However, if a wide beam is used then al
in the beam are 'beamed' aboard. (ie. nearby rocks, people, phasers,etc.)
that's the best I can do.
  					Drew Herman (her3) 
					@UChicago  <unix>
from ladyhawk 
  -- I talk to God all the time and frankly he's never mentioned you.