JREF Homepage Swift Blog Events Calendar $1 Million Paranormal Challenge The Amaz!ng Meeting Useful Links Support Us
James Randi Educational Foundation JREF Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   JREF Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
Click Here To Donate

Notices


Welcome to the JREF Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Tags star trek , teleportation

Reply
Old 1st December 2012, 05:45 AM   #241
Nick227
Illuminator
 
Nick227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dorset, UK
Posts: 3,417
Originally Posted by Thunderchief View Post
So the original and the copy are not individuals? You don't see them as separate beings? I think they are, they behave the same, but do so independently.
They are and are not individuals, which I appreciate doesn't help very much! The brain learns to create the illusion for itself of having a personal self that is doing and experiencing, but it doesn't actually have such a thing.

Thus it seems that when the original is killed so something tangible is lost - this experiencer or doer. If you yourself imagine getting into the pod and pushing the button, probably a voice inside is saying "I'm going to die!" Am I right?

But this is the illusion. There is, according to materialism, no "I" that is going to die here, just a body dematerialising, and being replaced with an identical copy.

Some body dies, but some one does not.

Nick
__________________
If you want to know what neural processing looks like... open your eyes!
Nick227 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 05:50 AM   #242
Nick227
Illuminator
 
Nick227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dorset, UK
Posts: 3,417
Originally Posted by rocketdodger View Post
You do have to destroy both, yes.

But you don't have to have two sets of memories. You merge both sets into a single set.

This is entirely possible if you think about it -- our memory doesn't work in terms of values. You don't remember "I was doing this 4 hours ago, and doing this 3 hours ago" etc. All you remember is the events themselves. To the extent that we can determine order, it is only based on our ability to infer logically based on the content of the memories.

For example, I bet if you recall something that happened years ago, and then recall something else, you can't tell immediately which happened first. You need to evaluate the contents of the memories to infer which *must* have happened first, given the content of the memories.

So merging a set of memories from your time on mars, with a set from your time on Earth, even though both spans of time are the same, is trivial ( in a mathematical sense ). What is not trivial is hooking up the neural networks properly without nuking important stuff.
What if, while I'm at work, I decide to go out to lunch? Using the teleport. My original, second one now, will remain hungry whilst the copy is merrily stuffing himself!

Plus, all this merging involves doing the one thing that you were trying to avoid - killing people. So my original doesn't go to work but just lazes around all day waiting for the copy, or copies to return. OK, he's avoided dying. But now, in order to merge with the copies, he has to be killed and a new, merged version created. If I'm trippy about being killed so my copy can go to work, wouldn't I be equally trippy about being killed just so some merged version of me can remember being at home and being at work?

Nick
__________________
If you want to know what neural processing looks like... open your eyes!

Last edited by Nick227; 1st December 2012 at 05:55 AM.
Nick227 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 05:53 AM   #243
Nick227
Illuminator
 
Nick227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dorset, UK
Posts: 3,417
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
You're going to No True Scotsman me? Really?

Alright chief, let's do this. How does identifying clones as two people count as being a "false materialist?"
The "false materialist detector" works by asking people if they would travel in the teletransporter (to give it its original name). (The version that kills the original and replaces it with a copy.) If they say "No" a loud buzzer sounds - uh-uhhh - and they fail!

Nick
__________________
If you want to know what neural processing looks like... open your eyes!
Nick227 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 09:35 AM   #244
Beelzebuddy
Master Poster
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,340
Originally Posted by Nick227 View Post
The "false materialist detector" works by asking people if they would travel in the teletransporter (to give it its original name). (The version that kills the original and replaces it with a copy.) If they say "No" a loud buzzer sounds - uh-uhhh - and they fail!

Nick
Oh, alright. Hey look, I can be dismissive too: whenever you want to stop being wrong, I'd be glad to talk.
Beelzebuddy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 10:07 AM   #245
Nick227
Illuminator
 
Nick227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dorset, UK
Posts: 3,417
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
Oh, alright. Hey look, I can be dismissive too:
I'm not being dismissive. I'm pointing out how the thought experiment works. Clones are individuals regardless of whether you're idealist or materialist. Clones have nothing to do with it. It's whether you would travel like this.

So... would you travel in the pod, knowing that nothing is really dying when you're body is recreated elsewhere, or are you not a real materialist?

Or are you one of the ones that wabbles on about the machine going wrong or what to do if the original doesn't die, or other irrelevant, avoid-the-question nonsense.

Nick

eta: ps, I'm pasting the original version of the thought experiment that Susan Blackmore uses with her class. Note that no quibbling is allowed...


The teletransporter (from http://www.susanblackmore.co.uk/Book...activities.htm)

Imagine you want to go to the beautiful city of Capetown for a holiday. You are offered a simple, free, almost instantaneous, and 100 per cent safe, way of getting there and back. All you have to do is step inside the box, press the button, and .....

The box is, of course, Parfit’s teletransporter. In making the journey every cell of your body and brain will be scanned and destroyed, and then replicated exactly as they were before, but in Capetown. Would you press the button?

To create a memorable exercise you might like to use a few chairs or tables to make the box and provide a colourful “Go” button for a volunteer inside to press. Would this volunteer press it? Does everyone else think they should? You can then ask everyone else to answer ‘Yes’ or ‘No’. Do not allow any ‘Don’t know’s (if people do not want to answer publicly then get them to write down ‘Yes’ or ‘No’). Do not allow students to quibble over safety or any other details – if they do so they have failed to understand the nature of thought experiments. In this one the box is 100% safe and reliable. If they won’t go in, this has to be for some other reason than that it might go wrong.

Now ask for a volunteer who said ‘Yes’ and ask them to explain why. Others can then ask further questions to work out, for example, why this person is not worried about having their body completely destroyed. Next ask for a ‘No’ volunteer and let others ask why she or he will not go. Bear in mind that people’s reasons for not going may involve their deepest beliefs about their soul, spirit, God, or life after death. It is helpful to remember this even while pushing people hard to explain what they mean.

After the discussion find out how many people have changed their minds. In a course on consciousness it is instructive to ask this same question again after a few weeks or months of study, and for this purpose it is helpful for people to keep a record of their answers. They may change.
__________________
If you want to know what neural processing looks like... open your eyes!

Last edited by Nick227; 1st December 2012 at 10:18 AM.
Nick227 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 10:46 AM   #246
Earthborn
Terrestrial Intelligence
 
Earthborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 5,835
Originally Posted by dasmiller View Post
First, I'll die if I don't sleep from time to time, so it's not quite the either/or proposition that the transporter is.
It does show though that your rule of thumb against doing something is useless. If you ask whether you will survive a thing, "in a manner of speaking" or "it depends on how you look at it" are correct answers no matter what that thing is. It is simply a fact of life that you are constantly dying and constantly be recreated. In order to survive in a manner of speaking you'll have to die if you look at it from a different angle.

Quote:
Second, I don't believe that consciousness has a sharply defined edge.
It doesn't, which is the point.

Quote:
I think that I'm still 'there' while sleeping, simply less aware;
You are still there while being digitised only in a different form. You are still there while the digital form is used to reconstruct you.

Quote:
I don't understand how the ongoing changes in my brain give rise to my perception of consciousness, so it's really not clear to me that the teleporter wouldn't represent a sharp change in continuity.
I think it mostly depends on how much time the transfer takes. If the person to be teleported is conscious, it can't take more than a few milliseconds before you'll end up with two diverging versions of you, and the you at the destination shouldn't be more different from the you in the sender than you would have been a few minutes later otherwise. If sending the person is unconscious and frozen or held in a Star Trek stasis field or whatever, the transferring process can take longer.

Quote:
If there's one receiver, why not 2? Why not 50? So suppose that the teleporter created 50 copies of you, and each copy had a wallet. If 49 of you died, the survivor would have all 50 wallets with all that money!
And a prison sentence for counterfitting money...

Quote:
So, let's suppose that the teleporter was set up to create 50 of you, each in a room with a gun. 49 of the guns are loaded, one isn't. You've just been teleported into a room, and the gun is sitting there in front of you.

Would you do it?
Do what? Kill myself? Kill another instance of myself? Check whether the gun is loaded?

Originally Posted by Checkmite View Post
It's a function, like the light emitted from a light bulb where my body is the bulb.
If you send the light bulb through the teletransporter, and screw it in, how would the emitted light be different?

Quote:
If it's theoretically possible for an outside observer to tell me that the body my consciousness turned off in is the same one my consciousness turned on in again in the morning, sleep doesn't bother me.
I don't think that is theoretically possible. The light from a light bulb seems pretty similar after it has been off for a while (despite being made from completely different photons), but my consciousness seems to constantly change; I certainly don't feel the same after a good night's sleep than before it.
__________________
Perhaps nothing is entirely true; and not even that!
Multatuli
Earthborn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 11:07 AM   #247
Jomante
Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 221
Originally Posted by Earthborn View Post
Don't go to sleep tonight. The person who wakes up tommorrow is not in all respects the same person as the one who went to bed. Your consciousness even "died" for some time.
No, your consciousness chose not to remember what happened. This is quite different from dying or even not being aware. When you wake up while dreaming you remember the dream. When you don't wake up in the middle of the dream, your brain sets aside the collection of thoughts and forgets them. Indeed, even when you wake up in the middle of a dream your brain still ends up trying to forget it. Brain activity continues the entire time you are asleep, at no time does it come to a complete halt so I would not accept that your consciousness "died" even though it may not remember what happened.

Quote:
Then you look at your arms wrongly. Your brain is constantly influenced by signals from your arms (and other body parts). Without them you are not the exact same person.

I would not agree. My brain together with another body would become a new entity. Some of my consciousness will linger, but this entity will be too different from me to be me. My old me would be mostly dead and only a bit alive.
That depends entirely on how you define yourself, which is one of the hardest parts of these thought experiments. I do not consider a radical change to the body (such as the loss of a limb) to mean that I am no longer and a new entity exists in my place. In my definition, I am the identity that goes by my name with my thoughts, my experiences, and the supporting structure for processing and storing the information. That's not for one moment, but for the length of time that the supporting structure continues to provide brain activity. Any replication, no matter how perfect, is not me even though that replication may have the same thoughts and experiences as I had. Of course, this viewpoint contradicts yours which is:

Quote:
This is very different from making copies of me in the teletransporter: in that case both resulting bodies would be so similar to original me that there is no significant difference and both are me.
So if I made a near perfect replica of a Van Gogh painting, then should it be every bit as valuable as the original? I think you'd have a hard time convincing people of that, although you could certainly fool some into thinking it was the original but that's a different question.

Quote:
I am not convinced that two half brains that have experienced significant time in seperate bodies can converge back into one individual mind.
We don't really know, it could end up with two different personalities, or not. That's a weakness in my thought experiment is we don't know enough about the brain to say conclusively what would happen.

So a question I have for you: If you had to choose between being forced to use a teletransporter and getting a hair transplant, which would you choose?
Jomante is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 11:29 AM   #248
Earthborn
Terrestrial Intelligence
 
Earthborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 5,835
Originally Posted by Nick227 View Post
Note that no quibbling is allowed...
I think quibbling should be allowed. As the machine is presented here, a hard materialist can't object to being teleported, but must also conclude that the machine cannot even theoretically exist. The machine is magic, and cannot be made in a materialist universe. If something like it were made in a materialist universe, it would have limits on how accurately, quickly and safely it functions.

Blackmore's way of presenting the thought experiment forces people to take on of two positions: either you accept that the machine is magic, or that there is something magic like the soul the machine can't scan. If the soul exists the machine might not exist, and if the machine exists the soul might not exist. But you can't disprove one magical concept with another.

It is a bit like the thought experiment with the lightyear-long rod made of perfectly rigid material that is sometimes used to challenge relativity. Push on one end and the other end is moved simultaneously, which would allow superluminal communication. But the perfectly rigid material is impossible in a relativistic universe, so one either has to accept the existence of the rod and assume relativity is false in the thought experiment, or one has to accept relativity and argue that the rod does not exist. A thought experiment can't include two irreconcilable concepts and still be useful.
__________________
Perhaps nothing is entirely true; and not even that!
Multatuli
Earthborn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 11:33 AM   #249
Beelzebuddy
Master Poster
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,340
Originally Posted by Nick227 View Post
I'm not being dismissive. I'm pointing out how the thought experiment works. Clones are individuals regardless of whether you're idealist or materialist. Clones have nothing to do with it. It's whether you would travel like this.
Clones have everything to do with it. Why do you think people in this thread keep insisting that it doesn't matter what happens in the middle so long as one of you enters and one of you leaves?

A teleporter that destroys the body and recreates it elsewhere via quantum mysticism isn't substantially different from one which doesn't destroy the body, just clones it remotely and the original is destroyed soon afterwards. And that one's not substantially different from one where the original is never destroyed at all, and now we've just got two clones. It's the same problem, you're just trying to get out of considering it in this particular instance by insisting that if we destroy one clone really really quickly, it doesn't count as being a person.

Quote:
So... would you travel in the pod, knowing that nothing is really dying when you're body is recreated elsewhere, or are you not a real materialist?
Again, bull. You're begging the question. In the teleporter case, your original dies and a clone is created. If I were to clone you nine times, line you all up and shoot all but the third individual, that individual would survive and the other nine would be murdered in cold blood. That they are all the same clade is inconsequential; they are each individual people and deserve to be regarded as such.

It seems to me the dualist perspective would be to disagree with this: all of these clones must share the same personhood/soul, so all you're really doing is clearing up confusion. Teleportation should be fine and dandy: you're still the same person, possessed of the same spirit in the eyes of the Lord, only now you're on Mars.

Seriously, how is it that the side which thinks your personal identity can zip around the universe like a thetan on PCP to anywhere a clone of your brain resides, and so long as one still gets away somewhere the others have no claim to human rights, even remotely the materialist perspective?

Do YOU put sugar on your porridge?


Quote:
Note that no quibbling is allowed...
...about the reliability of the teleporter and other such technicalities that answer the question without addressing the intended issue head-on. Which I notice is exactly what you're raising.

Last edited by Beelzebuddy; 1st December 2012 at 11:36 AM.
Beelzebuddy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 12:20 PM   #250
Earthborn
Terrestrial Intelligence
 
Earthborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 5,835
Originally Posted by Jomante View Post
No, your consciousness chose not to remember what happened.
When I wrote "your consciousness died for some time" I wasn't talking about dream-sleep, but deep-sleep.

Quote:
I do not consider a radical change to the body (such as the loss of a limb) to mean that I am no longer and a new entity exists in my place.
I do consider a radical change to the body, such as taking out half my brain and putting it in another body, that I am no longer. This other body has become a new entity that is not me in any meaningful way.

Quote:
Any replication, no matter how perfect, is not me even though that replication may have the same thoughts and experiences as I had.
This replication will disagree with you on that. And if the teletransporter works as advertised, you won't be around to contradict it.

Quote:
So if I made a near perfect replica of a Van Gogh painting, then should it be every bit as valuable as the original?
Yes, of course. Both perfect replica and original would probably be half as valuable as the original was before replication. If the original were destroyed, the perfect replica would become as valuable as the original once was.

Quote:
We don't really know, it could end up with two different personalities, or not. That's a weakness in my thought experiment is we don't know enough about the brain to say conclusively what would happen.
We probably know enough to say what might happen, though without any certainty whether it will happen any time it would be tried. One possibility is that both hemispheres have diverged so much by their separated experience that they can never resolve the conflicts between them and you might end up with a human whose left and right halves are constantly fighting, perhaps literally. Another possibility is that both hemispheres will greet each other as old friends and manage to work together as a unit, but still with a few residual quirks that betray that they were once separated. With the sensory input from the new body, they won't work as if they were the same person from which they were taken. Tastes and preferences will likely be very different, some memories may have remained.

Quote:
So a question I have for you: If you had to choose between being forced to use a teletransporter and getting a hair transplant, which would you choose?
Why would I get a hair transplant? I don't like being forced to do anything, but if I am assured of its safety I would choose the teletransporter. Seems like a more interesting experience.
__________________
Perhaps nothing is entirely true; and not even that!
Multatuli
Earthborn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 12:28 PM   #251
Nick227
Illuminator
 
Nick227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dorset, UK
Posts: 3,417
Originally Posted by Earthborn View Post
I think quibbling should be allowed. As the machine is presented here, a hard materialist can't object to being teleported, but must also conclude that the machine cannot even theoretically exist. The machine is magic, and cannot be made in a materialist universe. If something like it were made in a materialist universe, it would have limits on how accurately, quickly and safely it functions.
The thought experiment, as Blackmore presents it, gives people the opportunity to really look. Which personally I like.

There have been numerous teletransporter threads on the jref and I've participated in a fair few. There always seem to be a lot of people who to me just quibble on endlessly - what if the machine fails, what if you're still alive, what if this, what if that, what if, what if. I mean Blackmore clearly states that you can't quibble about these things, but it seems that on this forum people just can't not quibble.

I don't personally understand the rationale behind endlessly digging up all these "what if's". It's a thought experiment with a clearly articulated purpose. Quibbling is just a way of avoiding your own involvement. There are some really watery materialists on the JREF.

Nick
__________________
If you want to know what neural processing looks like... open your eyes!

Last edited by Nick227; 1st December 2012 at 12:29 PM.
Nick227 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 12:46 PM   #252
Beelzebuddy
Master Poster
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,340
Originally Posted by Nick227 View Post
I mean Blackmore clearly states that you can't quibble about these things,
Things which answer the question but avoid addressing the issue. Begging the question, by insisting that everyone accept that the original doesn't die as part of the premise, also avoids addressing the issue.

You are quibbling.
Beelzebuddy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 12:48 PM   #253
Earthborn
Terrestrial Intelligence
 
Earthborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 5,835
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
Clones have everything to do with it.
Using the term "clones" in this case is confusing as it is a term usually reserved for non-perfect replications of organisms by very different means than scanning and printing them out at atomic level, and who won't share the same experiences and memories.

Quote:
Why do you think people in this thread keep insisting that it doesn't matter what happens in the middle so long as one of you enters and one of you leaves?
Because it doesn't.

Quote:
It's the same problem, you're just trying to get out of considering it in this particular instance by insisting that if we destroy one clone really really quickly, it doesn't count as being a person.
If one is destroyed really really quickly, it doesn't count as being a different person.

Quote:
If I were to clone you nine times, line you all up and shoot all but the third individual, that individual would survive and the other nine would be murdered in cold blood. That they are all the same clade is inconsequential; they are each individual people and deserve to be regarded as such.
Only because you allowed them time to become different individual people and put some of them through the pain of dying from gunshot wounds.

Quote:
It seems to me the dualist perspective would be to disagree with this: all of these clones must share the same personhood/soul, so all you're really doing is clearing up confusion. Teleportation should be fine and dandy: you're still the same person, possessed of the same spirit in the eyes of the Lord, only now you're on Mars.
Indeed, the teleportation thought experiment doesn't help you distinguish between dualists and materialists. While some dualists might object to teleportation because they believe the machine cannot effectively scan their non-materialist soul, others might have no problem with it because they believe their non-materialist soul can find them at the destination without any difficulty, not being bound by space or time.

Quote:
Seriously, how is it that the side which thinks your personal identity can zip around the universe like a thetan on PCP to anywhere a clone of your brain resides, and so long as one still gets away somewhere the others have no claim to human rights, even remotely the materialist perspective?
... because a materialist thinks their personal identity is bound to their physical structure and is therefore replicated together with the rest of the body. Once you have a machine that allows the body to zip around the universe like a thetan on PCP, one's personal identity -- being part of that body -- inevitably follows.
__________________
Perhaps nothing is entirely true; and not even that!
Multatuli
Earthborn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 01:22 PM   #254
Beelzebuddy
Master Poster
 
Beelzebuddy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 2,340
Originally Posted by Earthborn View Post
Using the term "clones" in this case is confusing as it is a term usually reserved for non-perfect replications of organisms by very different means than scanning and printing them out at atomic level, and who won't share the same experiences and memories.
I should have reiterated what I mentioned upthread, that I'm using "clone" here in the pulpy SF sense of a magic box that makes two of you. You're right that it's confusing given the scientific definition, but that's actually science's problem since it was derived from the SF usage. "Clade" I'm deliberately swiping and using incorrectly as a group of clones in revenge, and also because "line" is too specific to the scientific use of "clone."


I hate omnislashing, so rather than respond to each tiny snippet I'm just going to cut to what I think is the core of the matter. Apologies in advance for any unintentional strawmanning.

Quote:
... because a materialist thinks their personal identity is bound to their physical structure and is therefore replicated together with the rest of the body. Once you have a machine that allows the body to zip around the universe like a thetan on PCP, one's personal identity -- being part of that body -- inevitably follows.
Yes, but once you replicate the body you end up with two personal identities. It doesn't matter a whit how much time they've had or haven't to grow apart, they're already two separate but presumably identical people. Yes, to the rest of the world it may make no difference which lives and which dies, but one of them is still living and one is still dying.

I found Nick's attempt to NTS me amusing, because I find I'm so materialist I crap secularism. For example, I don't think consciousness exists except as a convenient term to use from a metaphorical distance. Once you get up close it evaporates into the individual processes, which apart from their distributed interactions make up no unified whole that we can coherently describe.

Similarly I don't think personal identity exists except as a convenient fiction to tie actions and interpersonal relationships to. Outside of conversations like this it doesn't make much difference, 1 clade == 1 person == 1 personal identity, but now we have a chance to metaphorically get up close.

Up close, each clone has a functioning, healthy brain. Each clone is a functioning, healthy person. To kill a functioning, healthy person is murder, even if you've got an exact copy to replace him with. There is no unified whole tying the two people together. They're different, despite being identical. We now have a clade of two.

If you'd like, I can go into how I'd approach the legal ramifications of clades and the interactions of the people they comprise (for example, how would marrying into a clade work?), but I've nattered on long enough for one post already.
Beelzebuddy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 02:22 PM   #255
Myriad
Hyperthetical
Moderator
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,487
Ack! Double post. I shall now delete the text of this one, but the text will live on in the next post, so it's not really deleted.
__________________
Actually, most of my friends are pretty smart. So if they all jumped off a bridge I'd at least try to find out if they had a good reason.

Last edited by Myriad; 1st December 2012 at 04:29 PM.
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 02:22 PM   #256
Myriad
Hyperthetical
Moderator
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,487
Around 2100, transporter scientists finally give up and admit that transporting matter in liquid and gaseous phases has too many practical difficulties. However, there's a way around the problem: in 2060, a reliable process for cryogenically freezing and then reviving people was perfected and has been in steady (though not frequent) use since then. The freezing process is to a chemically inert solid state; there is no heartbeat or brain activity while frozen. The process has been developed sufficiently that there is no tissue damage, and people who have been frozen and revived claim to think, and verifiably behave, as if they were the same person who was frozen.

The teletransportation process thus becomes: first, freeze the person, then scan/destroy the frozen person while sending the information to re-create the frozen person at the destination, then revive the frozen person at the destination.

Obviously this process is no longer suitable for routine trips to the grocery store, or even transcontinental travel (except for very wealthy people who find it worth the cost to reduce the time of a long transcontinental trip down to six hours or so -- most of which is spent recovering after thawing -- instead of 20), but it's great for going to mars or the L5 stations.

I assume that anyone who would take the standard teletransporter would also take the modified one with cryo-freezing. But does the modified procedure change anyone else's view? Here are some possibilities to choose from --

- I would not take the teletransporter, and for the same reason I would not undergo cyro freezing, even if I were not teletransported while frozen.

- I would not take the standard teletransporter, and I would not be willing to be teletransported while frozen, but undergoing cryofreezing and revival itself wouldn't be a problem if there were a good reason for it.

- I would not take the standard teletransporter, but I would use the modified form with cryofreezing.

Respectfully,
Myriad
__________________
Actually, most of my friends are pretty smart. So if they all jumped off a bridge I'd at least try to find out if they had a good reason.

Last edited by Myriad; 1st December 2012 at 02:24 PM.
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 03:32 PM   #257
blobru
Philosopher
 
blobru's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 6,825
I agree with Myriad [post #255], but disagree with his clone [post #256] (or my clone does; I'm not sure).
__________________
"Say to them, 'I am Nobody!'" -- Ulysses to the Cyclops

"Never mind. I can't read." -- Hokulele to the Easter Bunny

Last edited by blobru; 1st December 2012 at 03:34 PM.
blobru is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 04:08 PM   #258
Nick227
Illuminator
 
Nick227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dorset, UK
Posts: 3,417
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
I've nattered on long enough for one post already.
So, you're in the pod. Are you going to push the button, not push the button... or continue nattering?

Nick
__________________
If you want to know what neural processing looks like... open your eyes!
Nick227 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 04:19 PM   #259
Gawdzilla
121.92-meter mutant fire-breathing lizard-thingy
 
Gawdzilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northern St. Louis County, Missouri.
Posts: 19,193
Originally Posted by AvalonXQ View Post
And yet we talk about moving files, because we recognize that when we create an identical file elsewhere, nothing is lost.
How do you know that is true in the case of a transporter?
__________________
World War II Diplomatic and Political Resources
Hyperwar, WWII Military History
Bellum se ipsum alet, mostly Doritos.
Gawdzilla is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 04:39 PM   #260
Jomante
Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 221
Originally Posted by Earthborn View Post
When I wrote "your consciousness died for some time" I wasn't talking about dream-sleep, but deep-sleep.
Even so, deep-sleep still has brain activity going on, does it not? When a loud noise occurs in the house when you are in deep sleep, you awake do you not? Well, that depends on the person, but let me get to the point: You are still aware.

Quote:
I do consider a radical change to the body, such as taking out half my brain and putting it in another body, that I am no longer. This other body has become a new entity that is not me in any meaningful way.
So then when you are replicated with different atoms even though they may have the same quantum states aligned and be put into the same configuration, it is a new entity as well isn't it?
Quote:
Why would I get a hair transplant? I don't like being forced to do anything, but if I am assured of its safety I would choose the teletransporter. Seems like a more interesting experience.
But you aren't the one who had the experience, your replication was and if something went wrong and the original you wasn't destroyed in the process then you will go on wondering what the experience was like despite your replica having had the experience. And that is actually another interesting topic: If the original is not destroyed immediately, do you ask the original to submit to being destroyed later? How would you handle that?
Jomante is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 04:41 PM   #261
Jomante
Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 221
Originally Posted by Earthborn View Post
This replication will disagree with you on that. And if the teletransporter works as advertised, you won't be around to contradict it.
Actually, my replication would think the same way I'm thinking, which means it would know that it's not me, but that it's an individual with just as might right to live as I was.
Jomante is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 06:03 PM   #262
AvalonXQ
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 11,853
Originally Posted by Gawdzilla View Post
How do you know that is true in the case of a transporter?
By definition it has to be true if materialism is true. We are defining the teleportation as precisely replicating the material state. Unless there's something beyond the material state, by definition nothing is lost.
AvalonXQ is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 09:11 PM   #263
Earthborn
Terrestrial Intelligence
 
Earthborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 5,835
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
I should have reiterated what I mentioned upthread, that I'm using "clone" here in the pulpy SF sense of a magic box that makes two of you. You're right that it's confusing given the scientific definition, but that's actually science's problem since it was derived from the SF usage. "Clade" I'm deliberately swiping and using incorrectly as a group of clones in revenge, and also because "line" is too specific to the scientific use of "clone."
If you insist on using non-standard terminology, then you don't get to complain when people say "that has nothing to do with it!"

Quote:
Yes, but once you replicate the body you end up with two personal identities. It doesn't matter a whit how much time they've had or haven't to grow apart, they're already two separate but presumably identical people.
It matters a whit how much time the whole process takes. If the whole process can be done in less time that it takes for one signal to move from one neuron to another, there is no way you can claim there are two people each with a sense of personal identity. All the processes in the body have a finite speed, so if the teleportation happens faster you would not get two separate processes but one process that starts on the sending teleporter and finishes in the receiving one.

Quote:
Yes, to the rest of the world it may make no difference which lives and which dies, but one of them is still living and one is still dying.
Your choice of words betrays that time is relevant: "living" and "dying" imply processes that take some perceivable time. If the destruction process of the original is fast enough, no one experiences dying.

Quote:
I found Nick's attempt to NTS me amusing, because I find I'm so materialist I crap secularism.
I suggesting seeing your imam about that.

Quote:
Up close, each clone has a functioning, healthy brain.
That depends how fast the transfer happens. Let's suppose the destruction part of the transfer doesn't happen to the original, so we can look at the issue without having to consider question of "realness" or "originality". The machine is under development and the researcher testing it is not yet confident enough to have her original instance deconstructed. Instead only a copy is made and if anything is wrong with the copy it is deconstructed within microseconds. Does something that exists for only microseconds have a "functional healthy brain" ? I'd say no. How about if it exists only for femtoseconds? What if it exists for years? The time it takes matters. If the copy hasn't had time to experience anything approaching "personal identity" the original can deconstruct it without it being murder. Not so if the copy has been helping around in the lab for 12 years.
__________________
Perhaps nothing is entirely true; and not even that!
Multatuli
Earthborn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 09:32 PM   #264
Earthborn
Terrestrial Intelligence
 
Earthborn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Terra Firma
Posts: 5,835
Originally Posted by Jomante View Post
Even so, deep-sleep still has brain activity going on, does it not?
Yes, which is why I said "your consciousness died for some time" and didn't say "your brain died for some time".

Quote:
When a loud noise occurs in the house when you are in deep sleep, you awake do you not?
Possibly.

Quote:
You are still aware.
Not really.

Quote:
So then when you are replicated with different atoms even though they may have the same quantum states aligned and be put into the same configuration, it is a new entity as well isn't it?
Not necessarily. If the machine functions by quantum entanglement, then no: it is the same entity at two places at once. If it works at a less quantumy scale it depends on how quickly the teleportation occurs: has enough time elapsed for the entities to diverge to a degree that makes them less similar to each other than the original would have been to itself from one moment to the next.

Quote:
and if something went wrong
That's why I like to be convinced of the safety first.

Quote:
And that is actually another interesting topic: If the original is not destroyed immediately, do you ask the original to submit to being destroyed later? How would you handle that?
I don't think it is such an interesting topic, because the answer is to me pretty obvious: no, you don't get to ask the original to be destroyed later. You don't ask the copy to be destroyed either. If they differ to the degree of a perceptible amount of time, it would be murder.
__________________
Perhaps nothing is entirely true; and not even that!
Multatuli
Earthborn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2012, 11:30 PM   #265
xtifr
Graduate Poster
 
xtifr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Sol III
Posts: 1,248
Originally Posted by Gawdzilla View Post
How do you know that is true in the case of a transporter?
Because of the original premise. A Star Trek style transporter works properly*--otherwise Starfleet wouldn't use them. Making up alternate scenarios ("would you use something like a Star Trek transporter but with some horrible flaw") may be interesting, but it isn't answering the original question.

eta: * except when it doesn't, but fortunately for all users, it only fails when the plot demands it.
__________________
"Those who learn from history are doomed to watch others repeat it."
-- Anonymous Slashdot poster
"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore."
-- James Nicoll

Last edited by xtifr; 1st December 2012 at 11:31 PM.
xtifr is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2012, 12:30 AM   #266
Jomante
Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 221
Originally Posted by Earthborn View Post
Originally Posted by Jomante
You are still aware.
Not really.
Ok, admittedly this is my own viewpoint and I haven't found any scientific evidence to back it up, nor contradict it. We assume that since we don't remember we must have not been aware. Yet, we woke up when there was a funny sound -- why? To me it indicates that there must have been some awareness. I've had dreams where I've incorporated the sounds I heard into the dream (and then awoke so I remembered it). To me that indicates there is some level of awareness, even though the conscious is not thinking about it.

Quote:
Not necessarily. If the machine functions by quantum entanglement, then no: it is the same entity at two places at once. If it works at a less quantumy scale it depends on how quickly the teleportation occurs: has enough time elapsed for the entities to diverge to a degree that makes them less similar to each other than the original would have been to itself from one moment to the next.
If the ST teletransporter worked by quantum entanglement, then I would actually feel more comfortable with the concept because then there is a link between the original and replicated particles and now it's not just a copy of the particles reassembled. But I don't think you can do quantum entanglement with two particles that do not interact physically. If they proposed that somehow they were able to quantum entangle the particles at a distance, then I must have missed that. My understanding was that the star trek transporter worked on the same premise as the replicators, but where the replicators only stored data about the atoms, the transporter required the data at the quantum level and that was more information than the computer could possibly store so it could only be done in process.
Jomante is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2012, 12:35 AM   #267
xtifr
Graduate Poster
 
xtifr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Sol III
Posts: 1,248
Originally Posted by Jomante View Post
If the ST teletransporter worked by quantum entanglement, then I would actually feel more comfortable with the concept because then there is a link between the original and replicated particles and now it's not just a copy of the particles reassembled. But I don't think you can do quantum entanglement with two particles that do not interact physically. If they proposed that somehow they were able to quantum entangle the particles at a distance, then I must have missed that. My understanding was that the star trek transporter worked on the same premise as the replicators, but where the replicators only stored data about the atoms, the transporter required the data at the quantum level and that was more information than the computer could possibly store so it could only be done in process.
Your understanding of the ST transporter mechanism matches mine, but I'm still not sure why it matters. Of course, I'm a firm advocate of "a difference that makes no difference is no difference", which is why I'm fine with getting into a (well-tested) ST-type transporter. Those who get all funny about the philosophical implications are welcome to stay home and miss out on all the fun.
__________________
"Those who learn from history are doomed to watch others repeat it."
-- Anonymous Slashdot poster
"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore."
-- James Nicoll
xtifr is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2012, 12:52 AM   #268
Jomante
Thinker
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 221
Originally Posted by xtifr View Post
Your understanding of the ST transporter mechanism matches mine, but I'm still not sure why it matters. Of course, I'm a firm advocate of "a difference that makes no difference is no difference", which is why I'm fine with getting into a (well-tested) ST-type transporter.
Simply put, a copy is not the original not matter how accurate the copy is and whether or not the original was kept. Does it make a difference to anybody who doesn't know that it is just a copy? No. It can just make a difference to the original.
Jomante is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2012, 12:53 AM   #269
Mudcat
Man of a Thousand Memes
 
Mudcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,171
Originally Posted by Beelzebuddy View Post
Raw materials. Given a 5% failure rate, say, it'd be insane to use on humans, but shipping steel, air, etc to a colony on Mars would be invaluable.
If you set up a bunch of relays, you could probably beam those same materials from one planet to the next, provided they are in conjunction with each other on their orbits around the sun.

Otherwise, interplanetary shipping would be done using industrial ships.

I can't see transporters being used for anything but transporting materials into transport ships, however.
__________________
The major problem with Ocham's Razor is that while the simplest answer may be the best answer that doesn't make it the only answer or the right one.


Kopji: A perfect utopia where everyone follows the rules is more like a hell than a heaven.

Last edited by Mudcat; 2nd December 2012 at 01:27 AM.
Mudcat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2012, 12:56 AM   #270
Edx
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,429
Originally Posted by Travis View Post
I don't think I would. I would be too afraid that a mess up in the transmission would leave me without skin on the other side or something. Or, for that matter, that I might apparate someplace where I shouldn't be apparating. You know like half of me is in a rock or something.

And what would happen if a person was standing where I beam into?
lol no because as far as I understand it, you arent being transported you are being essentially killed and recreated each time. So, everytime you used it you're just being copied. Now my clone may believe it has been successfully transported, and there may be no way to tell the difference, but the original me is still dead. I want to be transported, not copied.

Last edited by Edx; 2nd December 2012 at 12:59 AM.
Edx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2012, 12:59 AM   #271
Croc411
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 97
Originally Posted by Earthborn View Post
I don't think it is such an interesting topic, because the answer is to me pretty obvious: no, you don't get to ask the original to be destroyed later. You don't ask the copy to be destroyed either. If they differ to the degree of a perceptible amount of time, it would be murder.
I don't think so, Earthborn. Can you call it 'murder' if you know that 99.999% of the original is preserved in the copy that lives on? Wouldn't this be equivalent to call it 'murder' when someone somehow erased just your last thought from your brain?

I guess a civilization that can copy, teleport or create individuals at will would have very different standards regarding the destruction of bodies than we have now. They might just file such events under 'minor accident' and go on.
Croc411 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2012, 12:59 AM   #272
Mudcat
Man of a Thousand Memes
 
Mudcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,171
Originally Posted by dafydd View Post
I'm not a fan of the show, I haven't seen many episodes. What kind of things used to go wrong?
You get transported with your insides on the outside, you get transported into a solid object, you get transported into another person (not good for either person, by the way), if all of the information that makes you up isn't transmitted faithfully you could materialize without a vital organ (like your brain, for example), it could scramble your internals up, stray solar flare could crop up and interrupt the signal and you simply cease to exist...

And the list goes on.
__________________
The major problem with Ocham's Razor is that while the simplest answer may be the best answer that doesn't make it the only answer or the right one.


Kopji: A perfect utopia where everyone follows the rules is more like a hell than a heaven.
Mudcat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2012, 01:00 AM   #273
Edx
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,429
Am I really going to spoil The Prestige if I say go watch that and then tell me you dont have a problem with teleportation?
Edx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2012, 01:04 AM   #274
xtifr
Graduate Poster
 
xtifr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Sol III
Posts: 1,248
Originally Posted by Jomante View Post
Simply put, a copy is not the original not matter how accurate the copy is and whether or not the original was kept. Does it make a difference to anybody who doesn't know that it is just a copy? No. It can just make a difference to the original.
What original? The original is gone, therefore it makes no difference to the original. QED.
__________________
"Those who learn from history are doomed to watch others repeat it."
-- Anonymous Slashdot poster
"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore."
-- James Nicoll
xtifr is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2012, 01:18 AM   #275
Croc411
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 97
Originally Posted by Jomante View Post
Simply put, a copy is not the original not matter how accurate the copy is and whether or not the original was kept.
As long as no one can show me what exactly is supposed to get lost in the process of copying I consider this an argument from intuition and reject it.
Croc411 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2012, 01:25 AM   #276
Edx
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,429
Originally Posted by xtifr View Post
Your understanding of the ST transporter mechanism matches mine, but I'm still not sure why it matters. Of course, I'm a firm advocate of "a difference that makes no difference is no difference", which is why I'm fine with getting into a (well-tested) ST-type transporter. Those who get all funny about the philosophical implications are welcome to stay home and miss out on all the fun.
But it does make a difference, it makes a difference to you because YOU will be dead. Your conciousness doesnt get transported into the copied body, your conciousness is being copied. It doesnt matter if your copy doesnt perceive it differently, or anyone else. YOU will be dead, your COPY will be alive, that is until it is also copied and therefore also dies only to be copied again. If at the end of my life I could be copied into a new body, I wouldnt care because I personally wouldnt be living on. I am a proponent of transhumanism, I want to live as long as possible, but such an idea is not preferable as I wouldnt really be living on. If you could get copied right now and you could stand next to your copy who is exactly the same in every possible way, would you feel fine if someone killed you? Thats how I see it.

Last edited by Edx; 2nd December 2012 at 01:28 AM.
Edx is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2012, 01:50 AM   #277
Croc411
Scholar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 97
Originally Posted by Edx View Post
But it does make a difference, it makes a difference to you because YOU will be dead. Your conciousness doesnt get transported into the copied body, your conciousness is being copied. It doesnt matter if your copy doesnt perceive it differently, or anyone else. YOU will be dead, your COPY will be alive, that is until it is also copied and therefore also dies only to be copied again. If at the end of my life I could be copied into a new body, I wouldnt care because I personally wouldnt be living on. I am a proponent of transhumanism, I want to live as long as possible, but such an idea is not preferable as I wouldnt really be living on. If you could get copied right now and you could stand next to your copy who is exactly the same in every possible way, would you feel fine if someone killed you? Thats how I see it.
Yes, I would feel fine. Because I know there is no persistent "me" anyway and there never was, that it's just an illusion. Because I know that the copy is so similar to me that I would not lose anything significant. Because I know that this world view is simple, fits the data perfectly and doesn't require magic.
Croc411 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2012, 10:58 AM   #278
Myriad
Hyperthetical
Moderator
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,487
I'd really like to know if there is anyone who would not use the teletransporter, but who would accept the freezing and revival process (without teleportation in between) I described earlier.

Assume an important, but not pure-survival, reason for doing either one, such as a space mission.

Respectfully,
Myriad
__________________
Actually, most of my friends are pretty smart. So if they all jumped off a bridge I'd at least try to find out if they had a good reason.
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2012, 01:50 PM   #279
Nick227
Illuminator
 
Nick227's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Dorset, UK
Posts: 3,417
Originally Posted by Edx View Post
But it does make a difference, it makes a difference to you because YOU will be dead. Your conciousness doesnt get transported into the copied body, your conciousness is being copied. It doesnt matter if your copy doesnt perceive it differently, or anyone else. YOU will be dead, your COPY will be alive, that is until it is also copied and therefore also dies only to be copied again.
This paragraph is about as dualistic as it gets. Nick
__________________
If you want to know what neural processing looks like... open your eyes!
Nick227 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 2nd December 2012, 01:58 PM   #280
xtifr
Graduate Poster
 
xtifr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Sol III
Posts: 1,248
Originally Posted by Edx View Post
But it does make a difference, it makes a difference to you because YOU will be dead.
No I won't. There'll be one me, just as there was before. If you can't tell whether a "death" really occurred without studying the intricate details of the mechanism, then it's a difference that makes no difference.

Basically, I'm using a black-box analogy to determine whether a difference can be described as meaningful. From the outside, there is no way to distinguish the copying teleporter from the transporting teleporter. Even for the subject. The original will be gone, and by definition, can't distinguish anything.
__________________
"Those who learn from history are doomed to watch others repeat it."
-- Anonymous Slashdot poster
"The problem with defending the purity of the English language is that English is about as pure as a cribhouse whore."
-- James Nicoll
xtifr is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

JREF Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:15 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2001-2013, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.