Talk:Holodeck

Programs

I've added a list of notable programs aboard the Enterprise-E, as observed on a screencap from Star Trek: First Contact. We could also add a list of programs aboard the Enterprise-D. Of course, this is only minutiae information, but it's fun. Ottens 12:32, 28 Aug 2004 (CEST)

Seems fine to me, but could you perhaps add some refs? -- Redge | Talk 20:44, 28 Aug 2004 (CEST)

Oops. Forget about that. They're all from a screencap from ST:FC. Ottens 11:47, 29 Aug 2004 (CEST)

Perhaps a holoprogram page is needed where we could list all known programs? There have been quite few named between TNG DS9 and VOY? Tyrant 13:43, 22 Jan 2005 (CET)Tyrant

How about a picture of the Voyager holodeck design?

PNA

PNA -- This is in DESPERATE need of references in the main article content! It also needs to be better organized. --Gvsualan 12:45, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The Holodeck originates with alien technology introduced on "Enterprise"'

StarTrek.com article

Trip Tucker first encountered Holodeck technology on a Xyrillian ship in the Season 1 Episode 4 show "Unexpected".

Would someone like to update the article?

David M. Carpenter

• Although Trip encountered holographic technology aboard the Xyrillian ship in "Unexpected", it was not a holodeck, but a holographic chamber similar but likely far less advanced to the holodecks used aboard Federation starships in the 24th century. There is currently an image of the Xyrillian holo-chamber on the holodeck page, but I do not feel it belongs there, since it was not referred to as a "holodeck". But I will make the appropriate edits, if they have not been made already. --From Andoria with Love 07:50, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC)
• I agree. But I'm not sure it is fair to exclude the Xyrillian technology. It is a good addition to the page (as well as the primitive holodeck from "The Practical Joker") in terms of the history of the technology as a whole, and not just limiting it to the Federation's use of the technology. Additionally, it might be good to add the fact that the Ferengi invented holosuite technology. --Alan del Beccio 08:23, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC)

  I don't know anything about the holodeck from "The Practical Joker" (I've only seen a few TAS eps in my lifetime, a very long time ago), but which episode cited that the Ferengi created holosuites? --From Andoria with Love 08:37, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC)

  • "The Alternate", see entry on Plegg, and "The Practical Joker", see entry on recreation room. --Alan del Beccio 09:10, 13 Oct 2005 (UTC)

Elevation

How exactly would different elevations work on a holodeck? What would happen if a holodeck recreated a cliff and if one jumped off of it? How would the holodeck recreate the feeling of falling? Finally, upon reaching the bottom, would the person sustain any injury?

I kind of wonder if the holodech also includes some gravity controls... I remember a VOY episode where B'elana went skydiving in a holodeck with the safety off. As I recall she ended the program before she landed and she just hung in the air for a beat before "landing". As for whether she would have been killed if there was an issue, it was implied that she was in at least some danger. -209.174.135.66 19:44, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, since the ships have the ability to alter the settings of their artificial gravity, it can be safely assumed that with an initial drop in conjunction with artificial gravity, you could realistically create the illusion of falling. As for injuries, I assume it would depend on the safety protocols. (Ddeschw 15:53, 2 September 2007 (UTC))

Also, IIRC there was mention in the TNG Tech Manual that force fields would play into it as well, much in the same way that inertial dampeners stop the crew from going flying during changes in speed. -- Kooky 05:08, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Still pna?

Does this article still need the pnas, or can one or both be removed at this point? -- Renegade54 18:18, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Objects, Holodeck walls, boundries.

The entry explaining objects and the limits of the holodeck is actually confusing, and may actually be incorrect.

"In doing so, however, the holodeck is aware only of its users; it does not recognize its own created objects. For example, if a person were to throw a holographic rock at the holodeck's walls, the rock would not be allowed to pass beyond the wall."

This may be true for the episode of "Encounter at Farpoint", however, in "Ship in a Bottle" Data needs to try to test and figure out if, himself, Picard, and Barclay are indeed still in the holodeck. Instead of grabbing any other object in the holodeck, Data takes off his Combadge to throw towards the holodeck wall. This, I assume, is because any other object in the holodeck, would appear to go past the "wall" and would appear to continue in a straight path, rather than the combadge (a real, physical non-holographic object), bouncing off the physical wall.

The fact that the holodeck was upgraded Bynars to seem "more realistic" could probably be a valid excuse for the behavior of the holodeck in the first episodes, and a later episode. (Aside from the fact that the earlier episodes were somewhat flawed by writers.)

I'm curious on your thoughts on this.

IceSage 12:09, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

it's also very possible that in 'Encounter at Farpoint' the program had a set boundry, and it was programmed to rebound objects off the boundry. -mithril

I was also curious to the nature of two or more living beings present in the same holoprojection, and how the projection can compensate two people moving in opposite directions, traveling, in a sense, a great distance from each other. For instance, in the episode, (TNG: "Elementary, Dear Data"), Data and La Forge are both quite a distance away from the captured Pulaski as they scour the city trying to find her. So how can the physics of a holoprojection explain their distance when they're still in the same room? Kisaoda 18 February, 2007 21:51 (CST)

I seem to remember during "Encounter at Farpoint" that Riker tells Data "It seems so real," where Data responds that "Much of it is." Following is a small discussion between the two in which it sounds that much of the general matter on the holodeck is real replicated objects, including the "rocks and vegetation" since they have a much simpler pattern (than a Human in transport). (Ref. TNG: "Encounter at Farpoint") Apparently this is forgotten after Season 1, as this would permit the holodeck virus, but would also account for how they would be unable to beam a chair from the holodeck, since based on the statement that simple patterns are replicated, the chair would exist. (Ref: TNG: "Ship in a Bottle" timecode 0:57:00)– Kooky 23:15, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, the treatment of the holodeck in all the ST series that it appears in can simply be ascribed to the basic axiom that any ST technology does whatever the writers need it to do to advance the story, and sometimes we find contradictory behavior even in the same episode -- for example, in "His Way", at one point Vic tells Odo that the drink he's poured for him isn't real booze anyway; this is a holosuite, remember? Then later in the same episode it's clear that if Kira were hungry, she'd dig into the delicious dinner Vic has served. In some episode (I no longer remember even in which series), someone explains that the holodeck is basically an outgrowth of replicator technology, which implies either that the starship crew lives on imaginary food or that you can be torn apart by a holographic bat'leth. Any sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology — and the holodeck is extremely advanced magic. – CraigG 06:11, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Romulan holodeck

Ed Miarecki says that he used a model of the "Jupiter 2" from "Lost In Space" hanging upside-down from the ceiling as the main holoprojector.--StAkAr Karnak 11:53, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Matter leaving the holodeck

Picking up on the discussion from talk:The Big Goodbye (episode), there are enough instances of matter (water, snowballs, lipstick, etc...) leaving the holodeck to probably elevate the discussion of inconsistencies in this article into something more concrete. Another thing comes to mind: food. In Elementary, Dear Data Pulaski has tea with Mortiarty; presumably the tea and crumpets would not dematerialize from her GI-tract when she leaves the holodeck! Any other instances of holodeck eating or drinking that anyone can think of, or thoughts on making this edit?

Personally, I am much more interested in figuring out how the holodeck created a virus in Angel One. Exolinguist 08:47, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Knowing the holodecks, it was probably a malfunction in the safety procols or something :P --OuroborosCobra ^talk 09:02, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, with the virus, it could survive outside the holodeck, theoretically; Viruses reproduce using the cells of it's host, mutating them into more viral cells... So the initial virus would be holographic, but the subsequent ones would be biological in nature.. But the problem is that holodecks can't actually re-create life..--Vercalos 06:33, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

About the food thing, It says on StarTrek.com that the Holodeck contains replicators so that all consumable material is replicated. Now, what I wanna know if the holodeck could be the ultamate shower; walk out and you're instantly dry.

While there is absolutely no explicit basis in canon for this statement, I think it makes logical sense and fits all the various discrepancies that have been raised when it comes to Holodeck matter. Think of it in the same sense that Hollywood does, everything is divided into two categories. Props and Set Dressings. Props are anything that the actors interact with, set dressings are everything else. Anything 'prop' is actually replicated by the holodeck (Provided its not too large/complex, ie: dance floors, the H.M.S. Enterprise, mountains.). Anything replicated is real, and can leave the holodeck at any time. This would include, the 'snowball'(Angel One), the Enterprise drawing and food eaten by Dr. Polaski(Elementary, Dear Data (episode)), and the water dripping from Wesley(Encounter at Farpoint (episode)). Anything that is scene dressing is a non-physical hologram made purely of photons and force fields (if physical interaction with the user is required) resulting in apparent disintegration upon leaving the range of a holo-emitter. The Doctor himself has admitted he is 'photons and force fields.' This differentiation would also make sense from a power efficiency standpoint as it is most likely less costly to simply project a photonic hologram than it is to actually replicate any item if it is purely 'for show.' As I said at the beginning, there is no basis in canon for this, but I think (and I'm sure y'all will prove me wrong within hours) that it fits most if not all of the observed characteristics for holodeck materials leaving the range of holo-emitters, including those involving Voyager's run in with the Hirogen when they converted a significant part of the ship. -- Kooky 05:32, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Holographic instruments?

Does anyone know of any canonical evidence of holographic scientific instruments? IE tricorders, and whether or not they were at all effective?--Vercalos 06:33, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

TNG: "Ship in a Bottle" makes use of a holographic transporter that appears to work, however when Data asked for a record of the transport logs to analyze them, the logs were empty. It was interesting that no log was created, however the optical characteristics and transporter harmonic was heard. It is possible that this was just simulated by the program, but due to the Holodeck inside the Holodeck nature of the situation, it is hard to speculate what was "real" and "simulated" as part of the program. It leads me to believe however that a holographic tricorder would work in the holodeck at the least, since the computer is aware of what is being analyzed and can feed that information to the tricorder. -Kooky 03:52, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Too dangerous for recreation?

Doesn't it puzzle anyone that the holodeck would even be legal, considering how profoundly dangerous it is, especially for a RECREATIONAL device? It has a MORTALITY FAILSAFE on it, for goodness sake, which FAILS MORE OFTEN THAN NOT! Considering how often the holodeck malfuctions, and how often its users get trapped inside unable to contact the rest of the ship, wouldn't it be a good idea to get those "minor bugs" out first, and take it offline until then. This is a device where suddenly shouting "COMPUTER FREEZE PROGRAM" can be needed to save one's life at any moment, and yet children are permitted to use it! It's extremely dangerous and addictive, yet people still insist on using it. It's the tobacco of the 24th Century ;-) Maybe towards the 25th Century there will be an anti-holodeck lobby? (just in time to be led by Buck Rogers?)

Consider the fact that we do not see the Holodeck every time it is used. We can safely assume that since when it malfunctions, it gets mentioned, that it actually goes most of the time not malfunctioning. Also, how many times do we see malfunctions on DS9? I cannot think of almost any, and we know those holosuits got used a lot. I think it is more of a fan joke that they break every episode. If you watched the news, and based your judgment on the safety of cars based on what little you saw there, you would never get in a car. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 05:27, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

see...if every starship got stranded in the delta quadrant... if every starship ran into the borg... or the romulans....or the Klingons (pre-alliance) ...or a devastating space-time anomaly ...or started a war with the dominion... if every star ship did those things...then no one would get into the death traps. the shows are about the extraordinary deathtraps that are magnets fro trouble. If its strange, and happens on the enterprise, its safe to say, that they have made it statisticly safe fore everyone else. (its a one in a million chance that holodeck safeties fail, and it happens on the enterprise...so the other 999,999 uses around that time are safe!). If everything worked like its saposed to it wouldnt be compelling tv. </drunk post> --6/6 _{Neural Transceiver} 07:11, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

too abstract

i think the word "holodeck" indicates to be a room on a starship not just a room. for example an holographic room on earth will not be designate as a "holodeck" rather than "holograpic room" or something. thats also the reason why the holodecks on DS9 are always be to designated as Holosuites. because there are not decks, just levels. what do you think? --Shisma _{Bitte korrigiert mich} 19:55, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that is true either. In VOY: "Pathfinder", Barclay stated that he used the Holodeck at Starfleet Communications Research Center to recreate Voyager. --Alan del Beccio 03:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I think the term Holodeck is more an indication of size of the space. Holodecks are traditionally very large, where a holosuite is more the size of TOS era quarters. USS Voyager also makes use of hololabs (I believe thats the term, its been awhile)) which are smaller than holosuites and have consoles present, along with a small hologrid, as seen in VOY: "Fair Haven".-Kooky 03:44, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps Holodeck, Holosuite, and Hololab are trade names. They sure sound like it, and if so, it's likely they have been fully genericized.Mal7798 06:09, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

I believe you're taking the term "Deck" as only one literal term. "Deck" can be in reference to many things, aside from "levels of a ship." For example, houses have "decks" which don't take up the whole house, or a whole floor. I believe the term "Deck" in Holodeck, is meant to denote that it's a specific separated part of the ship. There are many terms which could be appropriate for how the holodeck is setup... Like "Holoroom" or "Holohall" or "Holochamber," "Holostage," and even "Holocage." --IceSage 11:29, March 4, 2010 (UTC)

Alter the appearance of humans

The main article says "is unclear if this illusion works for Humans, because the only "persons" attending the program were Seven herself and the Doctor, who himself was holographic" when talking about altering the appearance of the people in the holodeck. However, in the Star Trek: Voyager eppisode The Killing Game, Torres is made to look pregnant and even feels the "burdens" of pregnancy.

Indeed. Further, in "These Are the Voyages...", it's clear that the ENT-era uniforms are holographic projections for Riker and Troi. (Ddeschw 15:53, 2 September 2007 (UTC))

Holographic Environment Simulator

Shisma has found this screencap, which gives the term "Holographic Environment Simulator". After a short discussion we created a new article "Holographischer Umgebungssimulator" (which is German for holographic environment simulator") including all the technical and historical stuff on holographich technology. It's still under construction, but it is planned to collect all that information there and to transform the article "Holodeck" (de) to something like Holosuite. Thought you should be informed about that a big change, --Bravomike 11:55, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Sex On The Holodeck

I apologize if I didn't do this right, either by format or etiquette. While I realize that my question is very gauche, but it is aften alluded to but never said. The problem I would see is that anyone could walk in and turn of the Holodeck. And one would find themselves in a compromising position. So, what is the consensus? Is it done? Or is it just "possible." It seems to be suggested when one of the Vulcans on Voyager enters Pan Foi. But it didn't help him, so maybe he didn't get to sow his wild oats.

Also, if the holodeck is of finite size, how do the get so many people in the room without you bumping into everyone, seeing everyone or hearing everyone when you are suppose to be say alone, or in a room inside an appartment in a city. Just curious. Sorry if I defaced this section. 69.1.59.67ID 2007-08-23

If I recall, Tuvok was able to perform Pon Farr with his holographic wife and it worked. But it didn't with Vorik, probably because it was his first Pon Farr. 74.229.215.99 16:57, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Wouldn't sex be the most realistic use of a holodeck considering, one could make their own programs? Judgeking

Something else I'd like to raise is what about the, um, left-over emissions? I mean, as soon as someone says "Computer, end program" after a holographic sexual encounter, does the floor need to be mopped up?

If the holodeck can replicate real matter to be snow, it can surely break down real matter into storage. It's the 24th century, for God's sake! --OuroborosCobra ^talk 07:23, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

Holodeck Filtering?

http://www.gamecouch.com/2008/01/the-holodeck-problem-and-interview-with-dr-judith-barad/

Have there ever been any episodes or anything written outside the canon which limits what crew members are allowed to do in the Holodeck? I'm working on a series of articles called "The Holodeck Problem" and I was wondering if there were any sources to turn to.

Thanks! -- Terry 19:10, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

What do you mean? In terms of actions, or content?--Terran Officer 21:40, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what the distinction would be. Would it be okay to kill a holo-Picard? -- 169.139.22.2 00:39, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Given the reaction of the crew during "Hollow Pursuits", I'd say not. --OuroborosCobra ^talk 00:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Geordi did say in that episode that there were no regulations about recreating people on the holodeck, so there probably aren't many, if any, regulations about the use of the holodeck in general. I would hope that there would be for children(and given the ability of the Enterprise computer there might be) even though none have been described.--31dot 13:27, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Cardassian Holosuite

I don't believe the holosuite image belongs as it isn't the same as a holodeck from tng. If that's the case then you might as well include an image of the enterprise holodeck on the holosuite page. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Morder (talk • contribs).

You want to remove the image of the Cardasian holosuite from the "Purpose and Design" section? OK, I think I understand that much of what you said. What's the reason, now? I didn't understand that at all. There are 3 different holosuite images in the article that aren't the same as a holodeck from TNG. What is it about the Cardassian one that makes it not belong here? And as far as what we might as well do goes, there are 2 images of the enterprise holodeck on the holosuite page. We might as well, indeed, and have actually done so. Could you say again what you're after and what your reasoning is? SennySix 16:26, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

It's a holosuite and not a holodeck. Two different entities. That's my reason. There are *no* images of the enterprise holodeck on the holosuite page there is only the holosuite from ds9. Morder 21:43, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh! My mistake. I get it now. Well, holosuites are special kinds of holodecks, so, I don't think anything is "broken" by having it here. This is the page which comprehensively covers "holo-rooms" and contains a lot of the holo-technology details and useage information. I mean, the Xyrillian holo-chamber is here, too, right? I think this article is actually incomplete, for not explaining that there's a version which specifically is a smaller commercial accommodation. SennySix 22:56, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, this is precisely why I decided I should ask before I remove it. I feel your explanation supersedes my reason. :) --Morder 23:02, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Cool, man. I've updated the caption with the missing info. SennySix 23:14, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Holodeck Physics

I noted that Holodeck Physics is one of the unwritten articles, and i just wondered if it actually requires an article all of its own. On the one hand it could provide a space for all of the technical bits and bobs, and also a space to go into some detail about the holoemitters and instances where people seem to walk out of the holodeck with seemingly holographic something or other still stuck to them, but is it necessary? Since some of that information already exists here? I realise that there is a limit to the canonical information we actually have on the subject, and i am not sure whether its important enough to warrant its own page, or that there is much more information available on holodeck physics, other than whats noted here to really need an article of its own. I wouldn't want to presume, and write something unnecessary. Your thoughts? T'Leisha 01:51, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Where does the reference come from? I see that your link to the nonexistent article isn't linked to by any other articles. If it was a specific term that was mentioned, I would say write it. We could always figure out what to do with it later.--31dot 01:58, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Voyager holodeck door set piece

I created a Background section for new info about the Voyager door setpiece. It wasn't really related to Purpose and Design, and is even more realworld than the background under P^D about the onscreen discrepancies, which is why I left that part where it is. --TribbleFurSuit 19:34, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Someone states second appearance let's have an episode for that — Morder 19:54, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Split the article

There are various different types of hologram technology mentioned in this article but, as far as I am aware, only some of the technology designed and used by Starfleet was ever referred to as being a holodeck. Because of this, I think that a new article should be created, perhaps hologram technology, and used as a main article for all technology similar in appearance to a holodeck. It should not be biased towards the technology of any species or race. This article (holodeck) should be used solely to outline the Federation holodecks.

What do people think of this idea? If it gets enough consensus, I will start working on it if I'm not beaten to it. I do think a better name for the other article should be thought of, however, if this new article does get created. J Di 14:46, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Holographic technology is an existing red link that might better suffice. --Alan 20:32, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I was thinking about using that as a title when I was writing my original post, but thought there may be confusion in the title; people may think it is refering to technology which is holographic in nature, rather than technology that produces holograms. J Di 20:36, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

The first sentence should make it clear then.

Related... does that not suggest that "warp technology" is made of warps? :) -- sulfur 20:45, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Lol! Fair point. Holographic technology it is, consensus permitting. Could somebody also comment on what is and isn't referred to as a holodeck? J Di 20:50, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Like for example there's holoemitters for projecting something like the EMH, or that holographic comm system that appeared all of once in DS9? Fleurdelista 20:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

It actually appeared twice, in "For the Cause" and "Doctor Bashir, I Presume"?--31dot 21:06, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Wasn't that more of a holoemitter, since Louis Zimmerman was working on the LMH? I don't remember the holocommunicator in that episode. --Fleurdelista 21:15, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

The Admiral at the end appeared on DS9 by holo-com.--31dot 21:16, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Not quite. I was asking if the term holodeck is used by anybody other than Starfleet in any way. J Di 20:55, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Quark referred to them as holosuites, which is similar, but other than in Voyager, holographic technology by other races didn't appear, excepting the Xyrillians. At least as far as I remember, anyway. --Fleurdelista 21:15, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Holo-technology/holotechnology (not sure the proper hyphenation) is also a valid term, and is also found at Tools and technology. --Alan 21:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I'd lean toward no hyphen. -- sulfur 21:31, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Personally, I don't think combining the two words looks better; it looks too fan-inspired and informal to me. J Di 21:49, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Did anybody check out this? --TribbleFurSuit 22:38, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah, but Holo-technology/holotechnology isn't fan inspired...the term actually saw more usage in VOY (which is where all my aforementioned term. refs. come from) than the full term, be it "holographic-" or "holodeck technology". ---22:45, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

TribbleFurSuit: Yes, I have seen that. As for the name thing, I'm not too keen on one word. Thinking back on it, I do remember the portmanteau being used more than separate words but I still don't feel it's an appropriate for use as an encyclopaedia article. Meh that's just me, though. J Di 22:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Of course... we use what was used in canon. Whether it seems appropriate or not. -- sulfur 22:57, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm not saying we shouldn't, merely stating my opinion. J Di 23:00, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

"Photons be Free"

In the article, it says that Photons be Free appeared in the episode, Tinker, Tenor, Doctor, Spy of Voyager. The episode was actually Author Author of voyager. Can someone change that?

It's been fixed, but feel free to create an account with us, as any user can edit and fix things in the articles. =) - AJ Halliwell 02:48, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Limited space?

I understand the reasoning behind why people can seemingly walk in one direction forever. However I'm curious as to how more than maybe a dozen people can fit in a single holodeck without crashing into one another. Specifically I'm watching VOY: Alter Ego and half the crew are at a Luau in a holodeck that I don't think could hold that many people (though that's just an opinion).

So how do all those people mill around without hitting one another?

It's due to the holoemitters producing an inverse tachyon field in the photonic matrix. By spatially-phase adjusting the graviton polarity sources, the computer can alter the plasma waveguides in such a way as to allow the subspace variance to repolarize. Then, by alternating the tetryon modulators, the space in the holodeck can be increased. For more information, see here. -Angry Future Romulan 19:04, August 20, 2010 (UTC)

Why weren't there multiplayer matches with other ships' teams?

All holodeck games only involved crewmembers in a single ship. Why didn't the shows depict hologaming networks between ships, stations, and planetside facilities? Multiplayer gaming is very much alive & well today, so why can't Holodecks have it? --70.179.169.115 04:42, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

The real world reason is most likely because it would have come across as extremely silly on-screen. What storyline could you have for that to happen? In-universe, just because it wasn't mentioned doesn't mean it doesn't exist. My personal opinion on the subject is that there simply wouldn't be multiplayer gaming on Starfleet vessels because they are an official organization with a job to do, not pleasure ships. The holodecks exist to provide some relief to the crew from their busy and sometimes dangerous jobs, they are not the main focus and should not distract from that. --| TrekFan ^{Open a channel} 05:10, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

Not really relevant to changing the article, but I believe "Dark Frontier" showed two different holodecks running an interlinked program(the rehearsal for the mission).--31dot 08:32, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, for Operation Fort Knox, but I believe the anon was asking about inter-ship matches. I'm sure it can be done, but I don't think Starfleet would permit it. Any inter-ship contests would most likely take place on a planet as a friendly sporting competition, not in the holodeck while the ship is on a mission. --| TrekFan ^{Open a channel} 08:56, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

I didn't say so but I meant to put that such a situation was probably the closest we've seen to what they were asking.--31dot 08:59, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Sorry. :( --| TrekFan ^{Open a channel} 09:59, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

Don't be sorry, I wasn't clear. You're not a Betazoid(I think). :) --31dot 18:56, April 10, 2011 (UTC)

"discrepancies"

If I'm not mistaken, all the strange behavior like objects created by the holodeck leaving the holodeck and the rock striking the holodeck wall occur in the first two seasons of TNG. If this is correct it suggests a simple explanation: when originally installed the holodecks use a combination of holographic and replicator technology, then after an upgrade they use holographic technology exclusively or almost exclusively. The paper that Data carries off the holodeck in "Elementary, Dear Data" is replicated and the book that disappears at the holodeck threshold in "Ship in a Bottle" is a hologram, not due to any difference in complexity between the objects but due to the different times in which they occur. Captrek (talk) 23:20, October 20, 2012 (UTC)

Move holoprogram list?

There is a section with a long list of holoprograms in this article, which isn't used to describe holodecks in any more detail. It looks like it should go into the holographic program article or maybe eliminated in favor of the holographic programs article (provided the list can be merged into it). Anyone else agree? Thebilldude (talk) 20:57, December 1, 2017 (UTC)

Removed / corrected text

I corrected this text since it's not exactly accurate next to the episode. It wasn't "impersonating" real matter as much as it was mimicking the functionality of a lung by fine control over the magnetic containment fields to allow matter to pass through in the intended ways, as described by The Doctor. Also, he didn't say it was at the molecular level. It's not necessarily true that it had to be that fine grain of control in order to mimick lungs, anyway.

By the 2370s, holodeck matter was able to impersonate real matter at the molecular level. (VOY: "Phage")

Thebilldude (talk) 14:10, December 4, 2017 (UTC)

I am re-wording this passage because it doesn't make sense and wasn't explained this way. Saying the holodeck "is aware only of its users" ignores several episodes in which holographic programs were run and cleanly handled fast movements of the objects that were part of the program. It makes more sense (to explain the scene in Encounter at Farpoint) to say that a person (Data) can take an unexpected action in the program that it can't anticipate.

Holodeck walls can generate holographic images that appear to extend for an unlimited distance, seemingly much larger than its own dimensions. In doing so, however, the holodeck is aware only of its users; it does not recognize its own created objects. For example, if a person were to throw a holographic rock at the holodeck's walls, the rock would not be allowed to pass beyond the wall (if it were of replicated matter). (TNG: "Encounter at Farpoint")

Thebilldude (talk) 05:12, January 29, 2018 (UTC)

Appearances Section

I just added the Appearances section and I would like to explain some things so other editors can change things as they see fit. I only included episodes where a holodeck is seen on a Federation/Starfleet ship. However, it would seem that the definition of holodeck is in dispute on both the article and the talk page. I personally only added episodes that were Federation technology. However, if other editors believe that holo-technology on alien ships should be added (like the Enterprise episode "Unexpected"), then they should add those episodes as they see fit. I don't really care either way.

I included the Voyager episode "Flesh and Blood" because the hirogen were using Federation holo-technology, when the program was ended the holo-simulator looked very similar to a federation holodeck (black with yellow lines), and they even refer to the Hirogen's simulated hunting as a "holodeck" in the episode. Therefore, I included "Flesh and Blood" on the list. If other editors want to use a more strict interpretation and want to remove that episode from the list: they should do so.

I also included the TNG episode "Future Imperfect" because a fake Romulan holodeck is seen but it's the exact same Federation design (black with yellow lines), if other editors want to use a more strict interpretation and want to remove that episode from the list: they should do so.

There is a lot of gray area here. So editors should add or remove episodes as they see fit; I don't really care. I personally used a more strict interpretation of the definition of holodeck (with the exception of those 2 episodes mentioned above) by only adding episodes that used federation holo-technology, because it's probably easier to add things later on than to have to sift through everything and remove later. RexxiA (talk) 22:57, October 5, 2019 (UTC)