EPTWhat would happen if you fought your clone? - Page 11
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
Postman
United States269 Posts
| ||
|
OptimusYale
Korea (South)1005 Posts
| ||
|
SpectreSOF
United States74 Posts
| ||
|
bibbaly
98 Posts
You wouldn't be going blow for blow like the episode in Arrested Development where the two identical twins fought and just mirrored each other. Your thoughts would be the same basically but the levels of aggression will vary, you might be aggressive in attacking your clone but your clone could be waiting to counter so then he can become the aggressor capitalizing on your mistake or vice versa. On April 11 2011 18:08 SpectreSOF wrote: I do believe this is one of those scenarios where the term Mutually Assured Destruction was coined for. How would the clone who is potentially losing the fight kill both fighters? | ||
|
KMARTRULES
Australia474 Posts
| ||
|
exalted
United States3612 Posts
Humans aren't even very rational creatures, so it is absurd to think that they will think the same thing under the exact same stimuli even if they are perfectly identical. I understand that is a hypothetical but even under the conditions you stated I think there is still a ton of randomness. There are a lot of situations where you must decide between a 50/50 mixup and in that split-second determine a reasonable choice. Even under the exact same stimuli I could easily make a different decision. To put it bluntly, if I played against a clone of myself in RPS, we certainly wouldn't be throwing out the same thing repeatedly. Perhaps I'm wrong. Would be cool to find out either way. | ||
|
pyrogenetix
United Arab Emirates5090 Posts
| ||
|
NastyMarine
United States1252 Posts
| ||
|
Irrelevant
United States2364 Posts
| ||
flamewheel
FREEAGLELAND26780 Posts
| ||
|
Zurles
United Kingdom1659 Posts
| ||
|
bubblegumbo
Taiwan1296 Posts
| ||
|
YoucriedWolf
Sweden1456 Posts
Both because of the randomness in the atomic/subatomic processes that goes through your body and because of the chaotic nature of a fight. For example if you throw a right hook and your clone throw a right hook your fists will not collide with each other, fragments of a second (or even seconds) will determine the outcome. It would also matter whether or not the real you are aware of the fact that you are real and that you are fighting a "clone" but i will assume for the sake of argument that you are not. | ||
|
T3tra
United States406 Posts
On April 10 2011 06:42 {CC}StealthBlue wrote: This thread reminds me of the conversation on The Ricky Gervais Show lmfao at that animated version of Ricky Gervais. Mr. Toad indeed. | ||
|
Clearout
Norway1060 Posts
http://www.cracked.com/blog/human-clones-do-you-fk-or-fight/  | ||
|
Champi
1422 Posts
I'd win. there is no doubt in my mind, geoff. none. | ||
|
Liveon
Netherlands1083 Posts
We'd never fight and just think about how we'd do the most damage in one hit. | ||
|
ArdentZeal
Germany155 Posts
| ||
|
gulati
United States2241 Posts
On April 10 2011 06:30 iNcontroL wrote: I'd win. Winning. Nah, but seriously. I had this question asked in a philosophy course; well, not exactly. But something very along the lines: "What if an unmovable object met an irresistable force?" The question is along the lines of fighting your clone; the exact replica of yourself dictating exactly how you think and move, so all your attacks and defenses would be perfectly offset. The answer to that question (and possibly this question) is that they can never co-exist. There is no possible way that two extremes can ever exist. If you consider your self-being as an extreme, and the clone of yourself existing with the same mentality, then neither of you could be defeated, thus making the problem at hand impossible. Just a way to look at it. Might not be perfectly applicable to this scenario, but it's definitely a mind warp | ||
|
Earll
Norway847 Posts
On April 11 2011 17:36 Akari Takai wrote: I was, but I can understand your confusion. Because I know what my clone knows, I know that I cannot be predictable. So I will be random. And I will make those random decisions based on my environment. Like, for instance, I have a bookshelf and I make decisions based on the title of the first book that I see on the bookshelf. My clone is not going to be EXACTLY in the same place that I am. So even if he has the same idea, he won't be choosing the same book, because it's not going to be the first book he sees, because he's not in the same position. And he can try and guess which book I saw first, but he won't KNOW for sure. I really feel like my clone and I would put each other into a rock-paper-scissors scenario. One of us would get lucky. Despite being exactly the same, because we know we are exactly the same, we can create differences from each other. Sorry I didn't make myself clear in my post. You need to realize that when a clone is perfectly cloned of you, you are both you, he is not a clone any more or less than you are, you are the excact same being, if you think "Oh I will fool this clone by acting like I normally would not do!" then the supposed clone will think the excact same thing and do the excact same thing. As for your whole enviorment argument, if the room is perfectly symetrical then the enviorment is a nonfactor. The putting yourself in a rock-paper-scissor scenario and/or getting lucky, would not happen. For the sake of it, lets just say that instead of fighting, you were to play rock paper scissor, now assuming what is mentioned in the OP Is true, then (in my humble opinion) if you were to play rock paper scissor, you could play it 10000 times in a row, and it would come out as a draw every single time. There is no such thing as random luck in a scenario like this one, as there is nothing that is percieved to be random. On April 11 2011 17:40 Postman wrote: Due to minor inconsistencies in the way we do things, which wouldn't be similarly inconsistent for both myself and my clone, one of us would end up getting the upper hand and winning via chaos theory. Although we would both attempt to do the same thing, at the same time, due to those minor inconsistencies we would experience a slightly unbalanced situation which would become more unbalanced over time eventually resulting in two separate thought patterns and actions taken. If you have minor incosistencies, the clone should have the same incosistiencies, if not its not a perfect clone. The chaos theory is not applicable here, and if anything it supports it being a draw. + Show Spoiler + Chaos theory studies the behavior of dynamical systems that are highly sensitive to initial conditions; an effect which is popularly referred to as the butterfly effect. Small differences in initial conditionssuch as those due to rounding errors in numerical computation) yield widely diverging outcomes for chaotic systems, rendering long-term prediction impossible in general.[1] This happens even though these systems are deterministic, meaning that their future behavior is fully determined by their initial conditions, with no random elements involved On April 11 2011 17:52 OptimusYale wrote: well the thing is you may be identical clones with identical thought patterns etc, but you'd be somewhat different when it comes to your agression levels. maybe you will be incensed at each other but theres still a level of randomness when it comes to hormone levels and physical reactions in your body. ever been in the same situation twice with different people and thought very differently on individual occasions? Your moves wil lbe governed by what your opponent is doing, fighting is as much defence as offence! If you have different agression levels its not identical clones. What you percieve to be random is not actually random. Your moves will indeed be governed by what your opponent is doing, but your opponent will be doing excactly the same as you are, and governing the excact same response that you are, you will then see this and re-respond with something which again is perfectly mirrored into death by dehydration most likely. On April 11 2011 18:14 bibbaly wrote: In a fight with your clone who has all of your memories and is in the same condition you're in it would end with one of the clones making a single mistake in the fight and it being ended. You wouldn't be going blow for blow like the episode in Arrested Development where the two identical twins fought and just mirrored each other. Your thoughts would be the same basically but the levels of aggression will vary, you might be aggressive in attacking your clone but your clone could be waiting to counter so then he can become the aggressor capitalizing on your mistake or vice versa. If one of the clines make a single mistake, then the other clone will make the excact same mistake, at the excact same time, in the excact same manner, if it does not it is not a perfect clone and therefor doesn ot apply to the OP. On April 11 2011 18:41 exalted wrote: Humans aren't even very rational creatures, so it is absurd to think that they will think the same thing under the exact same stimuli even if they are perfectly identical. I understand that is a hypothetical but even under the conditions you stated I think there is still a ton of randomness. There are a lot of situations where you must decide between a 50/50 mixup and in that split-second determine a reasonable choice. Even under the exact same stimuli I could easily make a different decision. To put it bluntly, if I played against a clone of myself in RPS, we certainly wouldn't be throwing out the same thing repeatedly. Perhaps I'm wrong. Would be cool to find out either way. Just because you cannot conciously explain why you chose option a or option b in a 50/50 decision does not mean there is not some subconcious part of you deciding it , which will be the excact same thing the subconciousness of the clone will decide. To put it in another light (and to bring in another fucked up only hypothetical concept.) Lets say I Put you in a room and have you choose a 50/50 thing (like between door A and door B for example) If I were to observe you outside of the enviorment that effects you, see that you choose door A, then travel back in time, and observe you agin, 100000 times over, You are going to choose A, every single time. Because even though it mights seem random to you, deep down, in some incredibly complex fucked up subconcious type of way, there is a reason for you chosing A. Maybe If i had asked you 0.002 seconds earlier, or 0.001 second later in a parelelle universe, you might have chosen B, but even with such miniscule differneces its still a completly different scenario. This clone v clone scenario is a scenario of 100000000000000000000000000% equality on both sides, in the same way that the theoretical travelling back in time is. Sorry If I am comming of as condescending or something I am trying not to n_n Anyway The only argument that I can see for it not being a draw, as i believe I stated earlier, is that there are true random elements on an atomic\subatomic level. Which we dont really have any way of knowing since anything that might seem random to us now, could easily just seem random because we do not have learned all the factors involved in that seemingly random process yet. | ||
| ||
