The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
SlyReaper
inflatable
Posts: 8015
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 11:09 pm UTC
Location: Bristol, Old Blighty

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby SlyReaper » Wed Apr 13, 2011 7:18 am UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
torgos wrote:My "non-smart" cell phone has better graphics than the computers on the USS enterprise.

TNG or TOS? Because the TNG computers can barely be considered "graphics."

Basically, we've advanced even TNG in everything except the warp drive and the impossible stuff like the transporter and matter replicator and holodeck. Our computers are more advanced, our video chat is about the same, we have access to at least as much information, our comm units are way more awesome, and we've solved Fermat's last theorem, which TNG predicted we wouldn't have.

In other words, we've advanced as far as the TNG universe except for the parts where we haven't. Yeah.
Image
What would Baron Harkonnen do?

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7588
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Zamfir » Wed Apr 13, 2011 7:26 am UTC

sourmìlk wrote:Basically, we've advanced even TNG in everything except the warp drive and the impossible stuff like the transporter and matter replicator and holodeck. Our computers are more advanced, our video chat is about the same, we have access to at least as much information, our comm units are way more awesome, and we've solved Fermat's last theorem, which TNG predicted we wouldn't have.

Star Trek without interstellar travel is like the bible without god.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby sourmìlk » Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:23 am UTC

SlyReaper wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:
torgos wrote:My "non-smart" cell phone has better graphics than the computers on the USS enterprise.

TNG or TOS? Because the TNG computers can barely be considered "graphics."

Basically, we've advanced even TNG in everything except the warp drive and the impossible stuff like the transporter and matter replicator and holodeck. Our computers are more advanced, our video chat is about the same, we have access to at least as much information, our comm units are way more awesome, and we've solved Fermat's last theorem, which TNG predicted we wouldn't have.

In other words, we've advanced as far as the TNG universe except for the parts where we haven't. Yeah.


More like "In 20 years we've exceeded about half of the technology in an estimate of what technology would be like 400 years in the future."

Zamfir wrote:Star Trek without interstellar travel is like the bible without god.


so... much better?
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
the_bandersnatch
Actually not so frumious.
Posts: 939
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:46 am UTC
Location: on a bed in a room inside a TV in a hotel room in a hotel on a Monopoly board

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby the_bandersnatch » Wed Apr 13, 2011 8:30 am UTC

Zing!
In girum imus nocte, et consumimur igni

User avatar
Lostdreams
Posts: 650
Joined: Fri Jun 04, 2010 5:19 pm UTC

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Lostdreams » Wed Apr 13, 2011 3:18 pm UTC

The Mighty Thesaurus wrote:
TrlstanC wrote:But, I'm still curious, did no one else ever learn about creationism in science class at some point, at least those who went to public school?

Sorry, we just learned science.

zmatt
Posts: 554
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 3:48 pm UTC

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby zmatt » Wed Apr 13, 2011 3:55 pm UTC

teleportation isn't impossible. Instead of trying to break it down to an atomic level where the Heisenberg uncertainty principle gets in the way, just break it down to the molecular level where it doesn't. Building things may be more complex, but you already have the ability to scan all the molecules in a person's body, map their locations and are able to quickly assemble molecules so I don't think it would be that big of a deal for them. Everyone one who talks about ST style teleporters seems to assume they would operate on the atomic level, even though when the show was made we already knew you couldn't do that.
clockworkmonk wrote:Except for Warren G. Harding. Fuck that guy.

Chen
Posts: 5571
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Chen » Wed Apr 13, 2011 4:52 pm UTC

zmatt wrote:teleportation isn't impossible. Instead of trying to break it down to an atomic level where the Heisenberg uncertainty principle gets in the way, just break it down to the molecular level where it doesn't. Building things may be more complex, but you already have the ability to scan all the molecules in a person's body, map their locations and are able to quickly assemble molecules so I don't think it would be that big of a deal for them. Everyone one who talks about ST style teleporters seems to assume they would operate on the atomic level, even though when the show was made we already knew you couldn't do that.


For ST they operate a quantum level (whatever that means) which is higher resolution than molecular for living things. For non-living matter (i.e., replicators) they use molecular resolution. They have fictional "Heisenberg compensators" to deal with the uncertainty principle.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby sourmìlk » Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:51 pm UTC

zmatt wrote:teleportation isn't impossible. Instead of trying to break it down to an atomic level where the Heisenberg uncertainty principle gets in the way, just break it down to the molecular level where it doesn't. Building things may be more complex, but you already have the ability to scan all the molecules in a person's body, map their locations and are able to quickly assemble molecules so I don't think it would be that big of a deal for them. Everyone one who talks about ST style teleporters seems to assume they would operate on the atomic level, even though when the show was made we already knew you couldn't do that.

I thought the problem wasn't scanning the data, but assembling it on the other side, i.e. matter creation. Isn't it impossible for us to condense energy into matter, not to mention that you'd need enough energy to blow up a country? And if you were to just rearrange the molecular structure of surrounding atoms, wouldn't that be chemically very dangerous? Like, you'd get explosions and such.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Box Boy
WINNING
Posts: 1356
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:33 pm UTC

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Box Boy » Thu Apr 14, 2011 8:48 pm UTC

also you'd die every time you teleport
Signatures are for chumps.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 14, 2011 8:52 pm UTC

Box Boy wrote:also you'd die every time you teleport

I never understood why this would be a problem. You only die for microseconds.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Box Boy
WINNING
Posts: 1356
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:33 pm UTC

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Box Boy » Thu Apr 14, 2011 8:54 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
Box Boy wrote:also you'd die every time you teleport

I never understood why this would be a problem. You only die for microseconds.

No, you die when your entire body is broken down, and unless we find a way to transfer 'souls' then the you that steps out the other side is pretty much a clone made from the same matter.

It's like cutting something and pasting it elsewhere, it looks like you're moving the thing, but you're really deleting it, archiving a copy, and creating that.
Signatures are for chumps.

zmatt
Posts: 554
Joined: Mon Feb 07, 2011 3:48 pm UTC

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby zmatt » Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:02 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
zmatt wrote:teleportation isn't impossible. Instead of trying to break it down to an atomic level where the Heisenberg uncertainty principle gets in the way, just break it down to the molecular level where it doesn't. Building things may be more complex, but you already have the ability to scan all the molecules in a person's body, map their locations and are able to quickly assemble molecules so I don't think it would be that big of a deal for them. Everyone one who talks about ST style teleporters seems to assume they would operate on the atomic level, even though when the show was made we already knew you couldn't do that.

I thought the problem wasn't scanning the data, but assembling it on the other side, i.e. matter creation. Isn't it impossible for us to condense energy into matter, not to mention that you'd need enough energy to blow up a country? And if you were to just rearrange the molecular structure of surrounding atoms, wouldn't that be chemically very dangerous? Like, you'd get explosions and such.


when I have ever heard someone ask a scientist about teleportation they always bring up Heisenberg. Getting around scanning, transmission and rebuilding is difficult, but not impossible. The way I would do it is treat the person like computer data. I would scan the molecules of their body, transmit that data and on the other side use the same "matter reserves" that that replicators use to rebuild them. This of course is little more than a glorified long range cloning machine. And yes, this form and the ST version would kill you. The ST one breaks you down and reassembles you (I'm sure that's a war crime somewhere) and mine doesn't actually transmit you, it just scans you and builds a copy.

If you wanted to actually "teleport" someone great distances instantly without killing or cloning I think you would have to have the technology to make small wormholes on the spot. The idea makes me shake with enthusiasm just thinking of how awesome that is.
clockworkmonk wrote:Except for Warren G. Harding. Fuck that guy.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:04 pm UTC

Box Boy wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:
Box Boy wrote:also you'd die every time you teleport

I never understood why this would be a problem. You only die for microseconds.

No, you die when your entire body is broken down, and unless we find a way to transfer 'souls' then the you that steps out the other side is pretty much a clone made from the same matter.

It's like cutting something and pasting it elsewhere, it looks like you're moving the thing, but you're really deleting it, archiving a copy, and creating that.

What's the actual difference though? Like, if the copy is exactly the same as the original, then there is literally no difference between killing somebody permanently and then creating a copy and killing somebody then resurrecting them.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Box Boy
WINNING
Posts: 1356
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:33 pm UTC

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Box Boy » Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:09 pm UTC

Because to you, the original you, it's over.
Your consciousness doesn't go across, just an archived copy that doesn't actually transfer the original, so as far as you're concerned it's eternal nothingness/heaven/hell/Valhalla. You die, and a clone is made, but it's not really you, because as I've said, you're dead.

It can have all your memories, your physical appearance, your personality, everything: but it's all a lie, because it never experienced what you have, it just thinks it does.
Signatures are for chumps.

Chen
Posts: 5571
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Chen » Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:09 pm UTC

Box Boy wrote:No, you die when your entire body is broken down, and unless we find a way to transfer 'souls' then the you that steps out the other side is pretty much a clone made from the same matter.

It's like cutting something and pasting it elsewhere, it looks like you're moving the thing, but you're really deleting it, archiving a copy, and creating that.


That assumes the "soul" is something that is not physical or related to your physical properties. Its not clear if that is the case or if a soul even exists.

It also assumes consciousness is not something physically related to your brain chemistry. Again its not clear if that is the case.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3989
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Dauric » Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:11 pm UTC

Box Boy wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:
Box Boy wrote:also you'd die every time you teleport

I never understood why this would be a problem. You only die for microseconds.

No, you die when your entire body is broken down, and unless we find a way to transfer 'souls' then the you that steps out the other side is pretty much a clone made from the same matter.

It's like cutting something and pasting it elsewhere, it looks like you're moving the thing, but you're really deleting it, archiving a copy, and creating that.


While the 'you' at the target site would perceive itself as being you at the destination, would you from the source perceive yourself as having moved to the target, or would you just be disassembled, dead, and no longer perceiving anything at all (or perceiving an afterlife of some flavor*).

*... Of course that leads to the question what happens in the "eternal hereafter" if teleporting creates a new you every time. Things could get confusing and people could end up wearing little light-up name tags like the androids in the Star Trek Episode about Harry Mudd's androids.
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:13 pm UTC

Box Boy wrote:Because to you, the original you, it's over.
Your consciousness doesn't go across, just an archived copy that doesn't actually transfer the original, so as far as you're concerned it's eternal nothingness/heaven/hell/Valhalla. You die, and a clone is made, but it's not really you, because as I've said, you're dead.

Sure your consciousness goes across. Who would make a transporter that couldn't transport a working brain?

It can have all your memories, your physical appearance, your personality, everything: but it's all a lie, because it never experienced what you have, it just thinks it does.


Except that it has, for all intents and purposes, experienced what you have because it remembers it and it's physical layout is affected by it. It's a copy of something that has experienced those things, therefore it has experienced those things.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Box Boy
WINNING
Posts: 1356
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:33 pm UTC

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Box Boy » Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:20 pm UTC

I...I don't think there's any religion where your soul will get transferred with your body if it's broken up and either scattered across the world to be remade elsewhere, or where it'll get popped inside a copy.
I also can't think of a justification for that, so I'll move onto your second point as I've nothing to argue against:
Chen wrote:It also assumes consciousness is not something physically related to your brain chemistry.
Consciousness is an abstract result of thousands of different sensory inputs, chemical reactions and other biological quirks, but I think it's safe to assume the body being broken down to a molecular level will end that all and kill you, and that rebuilding a copy won't bring back the original.

Really, I just can't see any way of arguing that teleportation doesn't kill the original and rebuild a new one at the end, even with the same molecules, unless you include uploading the mind into a machine and transferring it without somehow killing the person being transferred.

sourmìlk wrote:Except that it has, for all intents and purposes,
That isn't good enough though, because it didn't actually do them, it just believes it has, and, as you've said, has the marks that you gained from it. If we go by the idea that it hasn't got your mind in it, then it wasn't actually there, and it didn't do them.
sourmìlk wrote:Sure your consciousness goes across. Who would make a transporter that couldn't transport a working brain?
We-
sourmìlk wrote:transporter

That works, actually, assuming it transfers your (not actually physically real and thus able to be destroyed) consciousness as well.

EDIT:
sourmìlk wrote:Except that it has, for all intents and purposes, experienced what you have because it remembers it and it's physical layout is affected by it. It's a copy of something that has experienced those things, therefore it has experienced those things.

While it may have experienced them in the mental sense, and has the physical marks to prove it, it hasn't actually gone through them, the same way Neo In the Matrix having martial arts uploaded into his brain along with the physical results doesn't mean he actually went through the training.
Last edited by Box Boy on Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:24 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
Signatures are for chumps.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3989
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Dauric » Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:23 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
It can have all your memories, your physical appearance, your personality, everything: but it's all a lie, because it never experienced what you have, it just thinks it does.


Except that it has, for all intents and purposes, experienced what you have because it remembers it and it's physical layout is affected by it. It's a copy of something that has experienced those things, therefore it has experienced those things.


Again: Would the you from the sending terminal perceive yourself at the destination, or would the you from the sending terminal perceive death? We have no data on the soul, no understanding of how free will exists, if it exists at all, which is yet another question we don't have a definitive answer to.

It doesn't matter if the "you" at the destination has all the experiences of the person at the source, the question is does the person from the source continue gathering experiences at the destination?
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
Box Boy
WINNING
Posts: 1356
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:33 pm UTC

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Box Boy » Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:24 pm UTC

^ What he said, far more eloquently than I.
Signatures are for chumps.

User avatar
broken_escalator
They're called stairs
Posts: 3312
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2010 1:49 am UTC
Location: _| ̄|○

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby broken_escalator » Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:30 pm UTC

Its about to get Ship of Theseus all up in this biatch.

Chen
Posts: 5571
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Chen » Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:32 pm UTC

Box Boy wrote:Consciousness is an abstract result of thousands of different sensory inputs, chemical reactions and other biological quirks, but I think it's safe to assume the body being broken down to a molecular level will end that all and kill you, and that rebuilding a copy won't bring back the original.


Its only safe to assume that if you believe there is some part of us that cannot be quantified by physical law. I have no reason to believe that is true. I'll grant at our current understanding of science we cannot explain "free will" or the like, but without any other evidence I'm going to have to assume that it, along with a soul or whatever, will need to be governed by SOME physical laws. We're already assuming a transporter that can avoid uncertainty and other quantum effects, I fail to see why it can't also get around transporting one's consciousness or soul.

User avatar
Xeio
Friends, Faidites, Countrymen
Posts: 5101
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:12 am UTC
Location: C:\Users\Xeio\
Contact:

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Xeio » Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:35 pm UTC

Dauric wrote:Again: Would the you from the sending terminal perceive yourself at the destination, or would the you from the sending terminal perceive death? We have no data on the soul, no understanding of how free will exists, if it exists at all, which is yet another question we don't have a definitive answer to.

It doesn't matter if the "you" at the destination has all the experiences of the person at the source, the question is does the person from the source continue gathering experiences at the destination?
You beg the question of the soul by saying we have no data on it, so you're already presupposing there has to be something more than the atomic structure that makes us up.

I for one, would still join the stargate program if I had the chance. :)

User avatar
Box Boy
WINNING
Posts: 1356
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:33 pm UTC

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Box Boy » Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:37 pm UTC

Chen wrote:We're already assuming a transporter that can avoid uncertainty and other quantum effects, I fail to see why it can't also get around transporting one's consciousness or soul.
I thought we were talking 'throw their atoms here' like in Star Trek's earlier seasons, not ones that get around the issue.

My bad.
Signatures are for chumps.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3989
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Dauric » Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:47 pm UTC

Chen wrote:
Box Boy wrote:Consciousness is an abstract result of thousands of different sensory inputs, chemical reactions and other biological quirks, but I think it's safe to assume the body being broken down to a molecular level will end that all and kill you, and that rebuilding a copy won't bring back the original.


Its only safe to assume that if you believe there is some part of us that cannot be quantified by physical law. I have no reason to believe that is true. I'll grant at our current understanding of science we cannot explain "free will" or the like, but without any other evidence I'm going to have to assume that it, along with a soul or whatever, will need to be governed by SOME physical laws. We're already assuming a transporter that can avoid uncertainty and other quantum effects, I fail to see why it can't also get around transporting one's consciousness or soul.


Because we have no data on what constitutes a soul. We have lots of data on what constitutes a body, and (in theory, with the right near-magical technology) we could nano-assemble it from molecules if not subatomic particles to avoid quantum uncertainty, or assemble a body from cadaver parts if we're going to go all Mary-Shelly Gaslamp-Fantasy Steampunk.

We have no data on what physical properties constitute a soul to even remotely conjecture how to transport it. Does it require a transporter that operated at the quantum level? the molecular level?, maybe the soul is woven from pure strings of String Theory. Is the soul subject to quantum entanglement? Is the soul already entangled? Must a soul remain untangled to be a soul? Can the soul be transmitted over broadband? 56K Modem? OC-48 or OC-768 lines? What if someone "eavesdrops" on the wireless transmission of a soul?
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 14, 2011 9:55 pm UTC

Dauric wrote:
Chen wrote:
Box Boy wrote:Consciousness is an abstract result of thousands of different sensory inputs, chemical reactions and other biological quirks, but I think it's safe to assume the body being broken down to a molecular level will end that all and kill you, and that rebuilding a copy won't bring back the original.


Its only safe to assume that if you believe there is some part of us that cannot be quantified by physical law. I have no reason to believe that is true. I'll grant at our current understanding of science we cannot explain "free will" or the like, but without any other evidence I'm going to have to assume that it, along with a soul or whatever, will need to be governed by SOME physical laws. We're already assuming a transporter that can avoid uncertainty and other quantum effects, I fail to see why it can't also get around transporting one's consciousness or soul.


Because we have no data on what constitutes a soul. We have lots of data on what constitutes a body, and (in theory, with the right near-magical technology) we could nano-assemble it from molecules if not subatomic particles to avoid quantum uncertainty, or assemble a body from cadaver parts if we're going to go all Mary-Shelly Gaslamp-Fantasy Steampunk.


If we presume supernatural things that might get in our way, this discussion will never end. If we choose to assume the existence of supernatural things though, I'll add this: transportation is impossible because the space boogyman that hates transportation always gets in the way.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Box Boy
WINNING
Posts: 1356
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:33 pm UTC

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Box Boy » Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:00 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:If we presume supernatural things that might get in our way, this discussion will never end. If we choose to assume the existence of supernatural things though, I'll add this: transportation is impossible because the space boogyman that hates transportation always gets in the way.

But isn't he held at bay by the magical space police?
Signatures are for chumps.

User avatar
Garm
Posts: 2241
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2007 5:29 pm UTC
Location: Usually at work. Otherwise, Longmont, CO.

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Garm » Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:06 pm UTC

The Egyptian religion allows for the body to be ripped apart and the soul to wander over after it's reassembled (sans naughty bits, which might be a problem), or maybe that's just if you're a god. Who knows. I have a book at home titled "The Metaphysics of Star Trek" where they discuss this problem. I should reread that chapter.
Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.
- JFK

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3989
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Dauric » Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:10 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:If we presume supernatural things that might get in our way, this discussion will never end. If we choose to assume the existence of supernatural things though, I'll add this: transportation is impossible because the space boogyman that hates transportation always gets in the way.


Soul being shorthand for consciousness and perception by an individual. What is perception? How do we transmit perception? What is the engine behind conscious thought? If we copy the data of conscious thought to another location, how does the original copy at the source perceive the event?

Again, like I said the major question is not what does the person on the receiving end perceive, it's what does the person on the transmission end perceive. Does the conscious processes (and subconscious processes for that matter) continue processing at the destination after transmission, or does the source-copy get 'deleted' and that process ends.

Right now, the way we transmit data is to copy that data and send it elsewhere. Our current data-transmission paradigms don't even require the destruction of the original. How can we transmit data that -is- the original so you're not generating a copy?
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:13 pm UTC

Dauric wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:If we presume supernatural things that might get in our way, this discussion will never end. If we choose to assume the existence of supernatural things though, I'll add this: transportation is impossible because the space boogyman that hates transportation always gets in the way.


Soul being shorthand for consciousness and perception by an individual. What is perception? How do we transmit perception? What is the engine behind conscious thought? If we copy the data of conscious thought to another location, how does the original copy at the source perceive the event?


Just because we don't understand the nature of something doesn't give us justification to presume the supernatural. Consciousness resides in the physical world, and thus if a portion of the physical world is copied atom by atom, so is the consciousness.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3989
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Dauric » Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:17 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
Dauric wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:If we presume supernatural things that might get in our way, this discussion will never end. If we choose to assume the existence of supernatural things though, I'll add this: transportation is impossible because the space boogyman that hates transportation always gets in the way.


Soul being shorthand for consciousness and perception by an individual. What is perception? How do we transmit perception? What is the engine behind conscious thought? If we copy the data of conscious thought to another location, how does the original copy at the source perceive the event?


Just because we don't understand the nature of something doesn't give us justification to presume the supernatural. Consciousness resides in the physical world, and thus if a portion of the physical world is copied atom by atom, so is the consciousness.


Again: But what happens to the source?

Congratulations: You've made an exact duplicate at the receiving end of the transmission, but you've still got this original standing on your sending pad. What happens to the original? Does the original perceive the travel, or does the original perceive being copied and then shot in the head? If -I- were to travel by teleport would -I- perceive the travel, or would there be an exact duplicate of me in every respect on the destination end picking up where I left off, but -my- perception ends when the digitizing beam tears my body in to component pieces?
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:19 pm UTC

Dauric wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:
Dauric wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:If we presume supernatural things that might get in our way, this discussion will never end. If we choose to assume the existence of supernatural things though, I'll add this: transportation is impossible because the space boogyman that hates transportation always gets in the way.


Soul being shorthand for consciousness and perception by an individual. What is perception? How do we transmit perception? What is the engine behind conscious thought? If we copy the data of conscious thought to another location, how does the original copy at the source perceive the event?


Just because we don't understand the nature of something doesn't give us justification to presume the supernatural. Consciousness resides in the physical world, and thus if a portion of the physical world is copied atom by atom, so is the consciousness.


Again: But what happens to the source?

Congratulations: You've made an exact duplicate at the receiving end of the transmission, but you've still got this original standing on your sending pad. What happens to the original? Does the original perceive the travel, or does the original perceive being copied and then shot in the head? If -I- were to travel by teleport would -I- perceive the travel, or would there be an exact duplicate of me in every respect on the destination end picking up where I left off, but -my- perception ends when the digitizing beam tears my body in to component pieces?


Your last sentence is correct. Meaning that it is exactly the same as if you yourself made the journey. There is no difference between you being transported and an exact copy of you being transported. No tests can be done to show which is which.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3686
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Dark567 » Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:28 pm UTC

In TNG, there is an episode that basically shows that transporting involves death for the transported( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Cha ... Generation) ). Basically Riker attempts to transport and it correctly copies a new Riker at the destination, but the transporter fails to delete the old version, leaving two Rikers. It's pretty clear to me that the original Riker is the one with a constant conscientious from the beginning, and that in the typical transporter case, that the one coming out is just a copy. Basically the Ship of Theseus.
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3989
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Dauric » Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:29 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
Dauric wrote:Again: But what happens to the source?

Congratulations: You've made an exact duplicate at the receiving end of the transmission, but you've still got this original standing on your sending pad. What happens to the original? Does the original perceive the travel, or does the original perceive being copied and then shot in the head? If -I- were to travel by teleport would -I- perceive the travel, or would there be an exact duplicate of me in every respect on the destination end picking up where I left off, but -my- perception ends when the digitizing beam tears my body in to component pieces?


Your last sentence is correct. Meaning that it is exactly the same as if you yourself made the journey. There is no difference between you being transported and an exact copy of you being transported. No tests can be done to show which is which.


So -My- perception ends at the teleporter, well then -I- don't want to go. -You- may not be able to tell the difference, my clone may not be able to tell the difference, but -I'm- going to be killed, and -I- think that's a lousy way to travel.

Do you understand the difference between self-perception and the perception of others?
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:31 pm UTC

Dauric wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:
Dauric wrote:Again: But what happens to the source?

Congratulations: You've made an exact duplicate at the receiving end of the transmission, but you've still got this original standing on your sending pad. What happens to the original? Does the original perceive the travel, or does the original perceive being copied and then shot in the head? If -I- were to travel by teleport would -I- perceive the travel, or would there be an exact duplicate of me in every respect on the destination end picking up where I left off, but -my- perception ends when the digitizing beam tears my body in to component pieces?


Your last sentence is correct. Meaning that it is exactly the same as if you yourself made the journey. There is no difference between you being transported and an exact copy of you being transported. No tests can be done to show which is which.


So -My- perception ends at the teleporter, well then -I- don't want to go. -You- may not be able to tell the difference, my clone may not be able to tell the difference, but -I'm- going to be killed, and -I- think that's a lousy way to travel.

Do you understand the difference between self-perception and the perception of others?


Except that you're recreated on the other end. There is no unique aspect to "you" that can't be recreated via physical means.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Box Boy
WINNING
Posts: 1356
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:33 pm UTC

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Box Boy » Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:33 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:Except that you're recreated on the other end. There is no unique aspect to "you" that can't be recreated via physical means.
Incorrect, your personal perspective isn't able to be copied, only transferred or left where it is, and normal teleporters don't account for that. Being broken apart ends your perception of the world and kills you, so unless you can transfer your mind (assuming it can be separated from the original body) you'll die.
Signatures are for chumps.

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3686
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Dark567 » Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:35 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:Except that you're recreated on the other end. There is no unique aspect to "you" that can't be recreated via physical means.
A constant string of sapience can't. A teleporter has to break that up. Moreover, you still haven't responded to the Ship of Theseus. Particularly Hobbes addendum.

EDIT: And what if I was recreated on the other end, but not deleted over here? Would you still say that the copy is just a continuation of my consciousness?
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:39 pm UTC

Box Boy wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:Except that you're recreated on the other end. There is no unique aspect to "you" that can't be recreated via physical means.
Incorrect, your personal perspective isn't able to be copied, only transferred or left where it is, and normal teleporters don't account for that. Being broken apart ends your perception of the world and kills you, so unless you can transfer your mind (assuming it can be separated from the original body) you'll die.


Define "personal perspective."


As for the ship of Theseus: they are both the original ship. One has maintained the same structure with updated components (I am still me even if my atoms are recycled, as the structure is what defines me), and the other has the original parts in the original structure. But the situation isn't analagous because the ships are actually still different, whereas with the transporter both copies are legitimate copies.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Box Boy
WINNING
Posts: 1356
Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2008 9:33 pm UTC

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Box Boy » Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:57 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:Define "personal perspective."

Your perspective of the world around you, a viewpoint only you can achieve that ends with death (although being legally dead doesn't count as you get 'restarted' (so to speak) if brought back). It's...it's what makes you -you-, even if you don't buy into souls or what-have you.
That's the best way I can describe it, and if you genuinely don't know what this is I doubt this debate will ever go anywhere.
sourmìlk wrote:But the situation isn't analagous because the ships are actually still different, whereas with the transporter both copies are legitimate copies.
But you weren't talking about a transporter, something implied to ship you whole sale body and all without any moment of non-life, you were talking about a teleporter.
Also:
sourmìlk wrote:Your last sentence is correct. Meaning that it is exactly the same as if you yourself made the journey. There is no difference between you being transported and an exact copy of you being transported. No tests can be done to show which is which.
Just because we can't test a difference doesn't mean there can't be one.
Signatures are for chumps.

User avatar
Dauric
Posts: 3989
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:58 pm UTC
Location: In midair, traversing laterally over a container of sharks. No water, just sharks, with lasers.

Re: The Thread To Remind Me We're Living In The Future

Postby Dauric » Thu Apr 14, 2011 10:58 pm UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
Box Boy wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:Except that you're recreated on the other end. There is no unique aspect to "you" that can't be recreated via physical means.
Incorrect, your personal perspective isn't able to be copied, only transferred or left where it is, and normal teleporters don't account for that. Being broken apart ends your perception of the world and kills you, so unless you can transfer your mind (assuming it can be separated from the original body) you'll die.


Define "personal perspective."


You step in to the teleporter and a copy is made, but the bit that's supposed to de-rez you fails and the original you is left on the source teleport. The consciousness-stream/ Personal perspective, your "I am Me", self awareness, your thought process are left on the source pad, while an identical copy of those processes is on the other side of the research campus you work at in the receiving lab. Which one of you goes home to fuck your wife and which one of you is the homeless shlub who needs a new Social Security number because he's a non-entity who's not supposed to exist?
We're in the traffic-chopper over the XKCD boards where there's been a thread-derailment. A Liquified Godwin spill has evacuated threads in a fourty-post radius of the accident, Lolcats and TVTropes have broken free of their containers. It is believed that the Point has perished.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Leovan and 13 guests