# Talk:Heisenberg compensator

38,901pages on
this wiki

## Copy&Paste from Wikipedia Edit

I hope it is no problem that I duplicated the article from wikipedia ([1]), at least, since I wrote the article there myself.

Yes, if you wrote the article yourself, it's most certainly acceptable! It just means that the content is under what's called a "dual license". I admit I'm not sure what the legal ramifications of that are, but I do know that it's okay as far as we're concerned. Thank you for posting the notice, though -- it's very useful for future reference! -- Dan Carlson 16:34, 8 Jun 2004 (CEST)
I'm glad that the article survived the rough day at last. ;) keep it up.

## vfd for Heisenberg uncertainty principle Edit

Heisenberg uncertainty principle
This appears to be a suppliment to Heisenberg compensator, but doesnt appear to have ever been references in Trek. --Alan del Beccio 12:28, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)
• Move to the background of Heisenberg compensator. Jaf 13:56, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)Jaf
• Yeah, I think it's best to move it as background info as well, although the info might need to be slimmed down a bit. --From Andoria with Love 19:41, 8 Nov 2005 (UTC)

## Clarification of the Heisenberg Principle Edit

"It works around the problems caused by the Heisenberg uncertainty principle (hence the name), allowing the transporter sensors to compensate for the inability to determine the position and momentum of the target particles to the same degree of accuracy."

This isn't exactly accurate. The Heisenberg principle states that the uncertainty associated with measuring position (dx) and the uncertainty associated with measuring momentum (dp) obey the relation dp*dx >= 1/2, (where I have let Planck's constant h-bar = 1). In other words, if you measure the position with uncertainty dx, the SMALLEST uncertainty you can have in dp is 1/(2*dx). That does not mean that you can't measure them both with the same degree of accuracy EVER. If dx = 10, you could have dp = 10, since 100 is definitely greater than 1/2. What it DOES mean is that you can never measure both EXACTLY (dx = dp = 0). If you measure the position exactly, you have dx = 0, and thus dp = 1/0 = infinity (my apologies to the mathematicians in the crowd). It also means that if one of them (say, dx) is less than 1/(square root of 2), the other one (dp) has to be greater and they cannot be equal.

The question is, do the Heisenberg compensators allow you to have dx = dp = 0, or just close enough to 0 to rematerialize a person.

It is unknown how they work. The whole concept of the transporter is physically impossible because of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. The Heisenberg compensators were just a joke because they compensate for the Uncertainty Principle, which is rediculous. But to have the transporter to work you must have both the momentum and the position of a particle, so I guess the compensator does indeed allow you to measure dx and dp to a certain degree, maybe not 0 but small.--Maxwell Fawkes 12:05, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

## PNA-cite Edit

Specifically, the note about the replicators not having compensators, and why, needs to be cited. I don't think it is from any episode. It may be from a TM, but I honestly don't remember the TMs even talking about the Heisenberg compensators in relation to the replicators, let alone saying that they don't have them and why. I could be wrong, it has been a while since I read them. --OuroborosCobra talk 16:11, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

The Heisenberg compensators are a requirement for transporting living matter where quantum resolution is essential. A Replicator, on the other hand, requires a lower (molecular) resolution and therefore Heisenberg compensators are not necessary.
I removed the above information as it does not appear to be from any episode. If a source can be found, it can be put back into the article. --From Andoria with Love 11:23, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
The information about quantum vs molecular level resolution can be found in the TNG Tech Manual...I will replace the paragraph in the article.Capt Christopher Donovan 06:34, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Just want to double check, the TM says that the replicators don't have Heisenberg compensators? --OuroborosCobra talk 06:36, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

No, the TM does not say that. It says that replicators work on the molecular level and that, to safe space, the data is compressed. (to safe computer space. this also results in singlebit errors) Because of this, the compressing and molecular level, one can conclude that replicators don't need heisenberg compensators because they were never meant for lifeforms. In fact certain dishes can become toxic when replicated because of the singlebit errors. -- Q 07:33, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

If it doesn't actually say that repicators do not have Heisenberg compensators, than we are speculating. That is a bad idea, and from what I know of MA, not what we do. Based on Q's comment, I am removing the note again. Donovan, if you can put the quote here that directly says that replicators do not have the compensators, please do.

Let me make clear, I am not saying that replicators have them, I am saying that we do not know for sure whether they do or not. I think we should not have a note going one way or the other in this article. --OuroborosCobra talk 08:36, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Is it not a question of deducing ? Replicators are based on transporter technology, for lifeforms it is necessary to work on the quantum level, so heisenberg compensators are mandatory, objects etc can be made on the molecular level, less complex, so a heisenberg compensator is not necessary to create them. Aren't there more 'facts' on MA that are derived from deducing ? (can't think off any wright now, maybe events who are deduced because someone mentioned a year ?) -- Q 10:00, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
But "not necessary" doesn't necessarily mean "doesn't exist". That, and TM information shouldn't really make it into article space (unless as a background note) anyway... -- Cid Highwind 10:12, 16 August 2006 (UTC)
The Tech Manual is a permitted resource, so unless contradicted, it's information is valid (according to my understanding of the rules of canon precedence).
And to answer the question, the manual makes no mention of HCs at ALL...just the difference between quantum and molecular resolution. However, the inferrence I feel IS valid within the context of the available information. We have BRAINS people, and I feel it is acceptable to USE them, rather than waiting to be handed a precise quote or screencap. By the rules some people seem to hold to, we could not say that "1+1=2" in the Trek universe without a dialogue citation or a screencap of a display graphic saying it, which is IMO rediculous...Capt Christopher Donovan 06:32, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Everything else aside, yours isn't the only possible, valid inference given the info we have - which makes stating that outcome as a fact speculation, and we really don't like that. -- Cid Highwind 09:43, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

## removed Edit

Removed Background info

*In the Justice League Unlimited episode "The Return", Lex Luthor is heard telling The Atom to "connect the Heisenberg compensator".
That is sooo irrelevant> can we please take it out of the article?

## subspace field compensator != Heisenberg compensator Edit

The article currently states that a Heisenberg compensator is also referred to as a subspace field compensator. Given the names they would hardly seem like the same thing, and besides, I don't think there was ever any evidence in canon to support the idea that they're the same thing. Most likely the subspace field compensator simply compensates for yet another of the many variables involved in the transport process. Does anyone know where, if at all, a link between the two was drawn? -Mdettweiler 05:23, December 11, 2009 (UTC)
There also seems to be a redirect here from "Subspace field compensation". If the alternate name is removed from this article, that redirect should be deleted as well. -Mdettweiler 05:24, December 11, 2009 (UTC)

Since no further evidence for a "subspace field compensator" being the same thing as a Heisenberg compensator has been presented, I've removed the alternate name. However, there still is the question of the redirect from "subspace field compensation". Regardless of whether a "subspace field compensator" has been referenced in canon, that does not warrant an article on "subspace field compensation" which is a whole different animal, which I don't believe was ever referenced anyway. (The fact that nothing links to "subspace field compensation" except this talk page would seem to support that.) I'm going to put a PFID on it shortly. -Mdettweiler 23:18, March 19, 2010 (UTC)

## Article on how it works Edit

It doesn't belong in the article (because it's clearly not cannon), but there's a good little article on how the compensator could work at:

The Archaeologist's Guide to the Galaxy[2]

Just in case anyone here was interested. Of course, it's hard to beat the "Very well thank you" explainations.

## Citation needed Edit

The following note has lacked citation for a year now. If one can be found it can be returned:

• The Heisenberg compensator started originally as a joke put on the transporter console in TNG.

Cleanse ( talk | contribs ) 05:39, December 11, 2010 (UTC)