Talk:Baryon sweep

danger to lifeforms
just a question, about the sweep. since it destroys all lifeforms, what do you have to do with the bioneural gel packs like an intrepid class ship?

thx 70.70.209.80 23:15, 2 Sep 2005 (UTC)

Difficult to say really, however the bio-neural gel packs aren't really 'lifeforms', only organic. However, the sweep is dangerous to organic materials, so the sweep would effect ships like Intrepid-classes. There are some excuses to this, including the fact that the newer safer warp drives may not produce baryons. Other excuses could be modifications to the baryon sweep to prevent the damage of gel packs or that engineers remove gel packs before the sweep (But this would be time consuming, especially since a majority are in Jefferies tubes). Enzo Aquarius 23:32, 2 Sep 2005 (UTC)

What about Picard's fish or Data's cat, the Baryon Sweep did not kill Spot or poor Livingston (the fish, that servived the crash of E-D in Generations), granted Data might have taken Spot with him (or the sweep might be why Spot became a female cat latter on) but I don't think anyone but the capt. would care about saving the fish?-


 * Before they evacuated the ship, certain sensitive areas were protected by force-fields, such as the Computer Core. Perhaps, any non-transportable organic organisms were also protected in the same way.  This would also be applicable for bio-neural gel-packs, but then again, Intrepid-class engine design might've changed significantly enough to cause the Baryon Sweep to be not needed.  Zsingaya  Talk 19:21, 19 Oct 2005 (UTC)

explanation
Could maybe this baryon sweep be analogous to ocean ships having to have barnacles removed? Should someone make a mention that, all technical considerations aside, that this is all that baryon sweeps were supposed to be like?

Other Types of Sweeps
Are there other types of sweeps that reduce other types of radiation? Or is it just baryon? Off the subject here, is there a "sweep" that defragments the ship like a computer? --unsigned
 * I don't recall any other sweeps. As for defrag, that makes no sense. Do you defrag your car? No. Your car isn't a hard drive. Neither is a starship. --OuroborosCobra 01:41, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
 * What about defragmenting the computers in it?
 * Getting really of topic here. this might be better for the Reference Desk. --OuroborosCobra talk |undefined  23:03, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Which Baryons?
Just a thought here, as stated all chemical matter has baryons, so why are we sweeping them? Now, considering that the device doing this is a large array, and it does take considerable time, a simple pass of some kind of radiation is out of the question. Something more complex is going on. Suppose that, traveling at warp speeds, even with deflectors there would over the years at that speed be untold numbers of low impact particles gathering on the ship's hull. Eventually, considerable mass could be accumulated and enough of these could produce difficult-to-predict nuclear reactions, especially when large amounts of energy are involved and WORSE, when they are under the shields. This could lead to radiation close to the crew and inside the primary protection. What do we do? We use a form of transporter technology to carefully scan and sweep over the ship, yanking out the baryons that are out of place on the hull. Any electrons forming elements with them would then zip away as is their nature, possibly into anything too close. Hence, removing people and protecting computers as all these free electrons are roaming. Yanking only baryons save us a boatload of energy and allows a much simplified Heisenberg Compensator. At the same time it might clean out small dings and scratches, apply a coat of wax, and spray in a bit of new ship smell. :) --JCoyote 21:54, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Talk pages really are not meant to be soapboxes for so much speculation. --OuroborosCobra talk |undefined  23:16, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I'm just trying to use the talk page to state something in support of continuity that appears otherwise flawed. It's a long argument, but necessarily so, and I hoped it would forestall a lot of arguimg or reversion wars over the issue. But it definitely does not belong on the article. --69.11.173.34 10:37, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

removed text
I removed the following text:
 * This is never mentioned or even touched upon in VOY where it could have clearly been a problem. Since this episode it has never been mentioned again except as a possible explanation of the "5 year mission" limit of TOS as any more time could have resulted in radiation poisoning. However there is no proof to say the baryon sweep even existed then.

There's no need to elucidate where this was not mentioned. -- Renegade54 20:04, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Removed a similar passage:
 * It is possible that baryon sweeps are only meant for larger Federation starship classes, as the USS Voyager was stranded in the Delta Quadrant and was at near constant warp, yet never required a baryon sweep. Another possibility is that the problem of buildup was resolved by the time the Intrepid class was designed.or as voyager was far smaller it could have been performed without a huge space station--31dot 23:14, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Could the sweep be used as a sterilizer?
Let's say there was a microscopic lifeform on the ship. Could the baryon sweep be used as a sterilizer? It is established that the sweep is deadly to organic matter.


 * You seem to have answered your own question.--31dot 00:42, January 23, 2010 (UTC)