EPTdeath teleportation - Page 12
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
cz
United States3249 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States44393 Posts
On August 06 2010 21:21 jello_biafra wrote: Because there's only one set of their atoms, one person goes in, one person comes out. But it's not using the same atoms. The atoms aren't moving, the information about how to assemble any old atoms into you is what is teleported. There's no reason why that information can only be used once, other than ethical concerns. | ||
|
sikyon
Canada1045 Posts
There would be 2 of me. Simple. Elegant. There would now be 2 sikyons. Which one would be the original? Well they're indistinguashable so they're both the original, they're both me. If the machine killed one of me 30 seconds after... well one copy of me would continue to exist, so I would exist. Why should I believe conciousness is unique? If I believed that my clone did not have it's own conciousness and was not me, then I'm entering territority in which I only believe that I exist, and I can never prove that anybody else, clone or not, exists or thinks. I think alot of people are hamstringed by their belief that they are unique. If you could make a copy of yourself, you would be non-unique.... and that would have no impact on anything. | ||
|
Loffeman
Sweden105 Posts
 | ||
|
RifleCow
Canada637 Posts
When an electron absorbs a photon of a certain frequency it jumps outta existance only to reappear at a higher energy state with no fluid transition in between. We observe this happening as the same electron teleporting from one place to another; from a lower orbital to a higher orbital. Alternatively you could say that when absorbing the photon the electron and the photon annhilates only to be recreated later at an energy level that represents the sum of their energies. However, in the case of this electron and the case of the "death teleportation" you may argue the later but the former is what is truly believed. In the case of teleportation, what happens is a person, an identity, a consciousness is brought out of existence and then brought into existence again, continuing to live on in another location. The only requirement for this to happen is that the original must be destroyed before they are continued in the recreation. The moment when two completely the same individuals occupy the same universe their experiences differ and they become different people. Which begs the question, if I killed you in your sleep and then recreated you in the morning, would you still be the same person? I say yes - you were dead and then brought back to life, the same you was brought back to life, not a clone. | ||
|
Keilah
731 Posts
this conversation made me think of this | ||
|
SleepSheep
Canada344 Posts
On August 06 2010 19:32 KwarK wrote: Except the guy who steps out of the machine will say "fuck, that didn't work" and shoot himself in the head. no, you didn't understand. that's why you tell yourself that you'll only do it at the end of the day. that way the clone will have the benefit of eternal rest as well. all he has to do is live through another day and pass the baton on to the next copy | ||
|
KwarK
United States44393 Posts
On August 07 2010 06:59 Daimon wrote: no, you didn't understand. that's why you tell yourself that you'll only do it at the end of the day. that way the clone will have the benefit of eternal rest as well. all he has to do is live through another day and pass the baton on to the next copy No, you don't understand what you're trying to say. As far as the copy (not clone) is concerned, he's as old as the original. He lived through your "only one more day". This machine is no more an interuption to the consciousness than blinking would be. Each copy that came out would have lived for all the previous days, you could say to them "but you were just created by that machine" but they'd think, feel and remember for the past however many years they were alive. And if they intended to commit suicide yesterday and decided to have just one more day then they'd remember that day being over, even if their particular atoms didn't live it. | ||
|
Coagulation
United States9633 Posts
On August 07 2010 07:04 KwarK wrote: No, you don't understand what you're trying to say. As far as the copy (not clone) is concerned, he's as old as the original. He lived through your "only one more day". This machine is no more an interuption to the consciousness than blinking would be. Each copy that came out would have lived for all the previous days, you could say to them "but you were just created by that machine" but they'd think, feel and remember for the past however many years they were alive. And if they intended to commit suicide yesterday and decided to have just one more day then they'd remember that day being over, even if their particular atoms didn't live it. exactly the suicidal copy of you would never benefit anything from this process as the most recent copy would never have committed suicide in its consciousness it would perceive the continuation of its desire for death over and over with no results. however the copys that do initiate the suicide will be dead. this doesn't matter to the current copy however. | ||
|
hypercube
Hungary2735 Posts
On August 06 2010 21:38 KwarK wrote: But it's not using the same atoms. The atoms aren't moving, the information about how to assemble any old atoms into you is what is teleported. There's no reason why that information can only be used once, other than ethical concerns. FWIW, it's impossible to replicate quantum states. You can copy them by moving it to a different system and destroy the original, but copying it while keeping the original intact isn't allowed by the laws of physics as we know them. | ||
|
KwarK
United States44393 Posts
On August 07 2010 08:21 hypercube wrote: FWIW, it's impossible to replicate quantum states. You can copy them by moving it to a different system and destroy the original, but copying it while keeping the original intact isn't allowed by the laws of physics as we know them. Because you need to destroy the original to accurately measure it. But once you've copied it you could paste several times. I'm not suggesting keeping the original intact. I'm pointing out that after the original has been scanned and destroyed the data regarding them will be digital and will not expire after a single reading. You could make several copies. | ||
|
Half
United States2554 Posts
A copy of you isn't going to have your conscience. I think you meant to say "soul" which doesn't exist brah. Stop mythologizing consciousness. Its a physical phenomenon that is the result of physical, and possibly quantum processes. It should hold a very special place of value in our hearts, being sentient living beings and all, but it is nevertheless just a very complicated scientific phenomenon, just like the rest of us. If you feel the need to use a mythical entity, please use "spirit" or "soul". | ||
|
L
Canada4732 Posts
There is no evidence that it is not, but the vast majority of people like to fall back on the concept of a soul or some kind of mystic exceptionalism that only applies to humans. | ||
|
Half
United States2554 Posts
And why can't they just create new people with it from stored "patterns"? They could. But I feel like any society that is advanced enough to accomplish this feet would be ready to cope with the societal consequences of an infinite amount of physical personas for any given person. fyi you actually can build a wormhole that transmits data, at least theoretically. The only thing you need is an oscillating "tube" with height that is equal... to the size of the universe. I doubt any society working with multi-universal levels of energy would be limited physical bodies anymore. So if it reconstructed multiples of "you", then all of them would be you? Yes! Is it that hard for our chimp brains to get that? Are you saying we should stop using defibrillators because once a person goes brain dead the person we bring back is a different person? | ||
|
hypercube
Hungary2735 Posts
On August 07 2010 08:24 KwarK wrote: Because you need to destroy the original to accurately measure it. But once you've copied it you could paste several times. I'm not suggesting keeping the original intact. I'm pointing out that after the original has been scanned and destroyed the data regarding them will be digital and will not expire after a single reading. You could make several copies. I'm 100% sure this is incorrect. For example this would allow making more precise measurements than allowed by the uncertainty principle by making multiple copies and measuring the momentum and position on different copies to any precision. The problem is that you can't make a digital copy of the original state. You make a copy using entanglement and store the information as a quantum state of a new system. Then again, the only way to retreive the information in the "copy" you have to destroy the copy itself. | ||
|
HunterX11
United States1048 Posts
| ||
|
KwarK
United States44393 Posts
On August 07 2010 08:42 hypercube wrote: I'm 100% sure this is incorrect. For example this would allow making more precise measurements than allowed by the uncertainty principle by making multiple copies and measuring the momentum and position on different copies to any precision. The problem is that you can't make a digital copy of the original state. You make a copy using entanglement and store the information as a quantum state of a new system. Then again, the only way to retreive the information in the "copy" you have to destroy the copy itself. Well now we're getting into the technological limitations of a hypothetical machine. | ||
|
Half
United States2554 Posts
On August 07 2010 08:42 hypercube wrote: I'm 100% sure this is incorrect. For example this would allow making more precise measurements than allowed by the uncertainty principle by making multiple copies and measuring the momentum and position on different copies to any precision. The problem is that you can't make a digital copy of the original state. You make a copy using entanglement and store the information as a quantum state of a new system. Then again, the only way to retreive the information in the "copy" you have to destroy the copy itself. Really? Thats actually really cool that the universe somehow prevents a potentially socially challenging result (infinite people who are identical) of this problem :o. Anyway, to anyone who is still in the suicide camp, lets illustrate the issue. He's talking about consciousness. If there was a machine that could make a copy of you with the exact same thoughts, etc., there is no guarantee that your consciousness would be transferred to that copy. Consider: a machine that make an exact replica of you without killing you. You would still be only conscious of your original body, and the copy would seem like a separate entity. There is no evidence to say that this would change if you died and the copy lived. Therefore, it seems logical that the machine described in the OP will kill you permanently (erase your consciousness) and the copy would be a separate entity. This is probably what you're fearing. If I duplicate myself, identically, without killing the original (lets pretend thats possible, idk if it is), you might look at him and say "Hey, I'm still conscious", therefor, he is not me. Killing "me" (The physical entity with this though) would kill "me" forever, and I would not become "him". Right? No. Wrong. Lets use an alternate example of this paradox. Lets say I make a wormhole that is incredibly large, so big I can not only transmit information ftl, it can transmit actual matter. It is 100% stable, and I can walk through it np np without dieing, on a simple walkway. But instead of connecting it to some far off exotic destination, I connect it to another walkway exactly ten feet of it. The end result is I actually walk into the past. This is how FTL travel works. ( A wormhole, like this one, or the one used in the OP to transmit information/particle states, is theoretically doable, but requires an beam of energy with a height bigger then the universe (according to one model done by a physicist, though obviously, it has not been proven), so we're not talking about events that could possibly physically impossible. ) The end result is I end up meeting me....before I step into the wormhole.. Lets for a moment, ignore the thousands of batshit crazy things that defy all logic that could occur from this meet up, and move on. Now, I still have consciousness, because I am still in my original body with a state of mind that was never interrupted. It is still "my" body, my original body, the one that I was born with. At the same time, I know that is true for me in the past. After all, when I entered the portal, I was still all of those. So which one is the real you? They both are, and you know that, because you physical are/were in both positions, with an uninterrupted consciousness. You've created an identical deliemna without creating a scenario that could possibly result in either versions of you not being the real you. So. How do you solve this problem? The only answer is that regardless of how many times "you" are duplicated, then erased, is as long as some version of you still exist, so does your consciousness, because it is a local phenomenon bound by the rules of space and time. Their is no alternative that manages to answer the above phenomenon. | ||
|
Pablols
Chile519 Posts
| ||
|
hypercube
Hungary2735 Posts
On August 07 2010 08:52 KwarK wrote: Well now we're getting into the technological limitations of a hypothetical machine. Haha true. Then again you might not even need a perfect copy to recreate consciousness. After all you're not a perfect copy of the you that existed 5 minutes ago yet most people would argue you are the same person. Actually, I think the set of memories, thinking patterns and emotions and the relations between these, that define a person are relatively small, in the sense that it wouldn't take too much space to store them digitally. Add the belief that he is the person who lived through these things and a physical shell he can relate to, and voila, you recreated him. | ||
| ||
