bascule

Okay, I would like to propose a test based upon the method I've outlined here to differentiate between whether or not you are still "you" if copied by this method. Program the algorithm which deconstructs/translates across the portal barrier to filter certain types of molecules: some type of sleeping agent. Have someone enter the "portal" to where their body lies right down the middle, half virtual and half real. Administer the sleeping agent to the carotid artery on the "real" side. Allow the "real" side of the person to fall asleep and wake up again. Then without moving them, have the person write/type a report of their experience. If they experienced sleep, then awoke after the drug wore off, then consciousness cannot be transferred. However if they experienced a persistent state of wakefulness thanks to the virtual part of their consciousness, could it really be said that their consciousness had not been transferred? If epilepsy subjects can have half their brain removed without their consciousness being destroyed, then I don't see how this should really be different.

I see an immense progressive trend in human development which I think is being repeated elsewhere in the universe/multiverse and believe it's a manifestation of an earlier trend in fecund universes themselves. I believe this trend will ultimately result in reaching eschaton, the end of the universe. So yes, I don't believe "forever" is a valid concept, and believe causality has a finite "length" I seriously doubt anything scientific may be said of this.

While you're at it, you should also be asking why the CMB is non-uniform. I've heard several explanations: - Qunatum fluctuations - Spontaneously broken symmetries - Nonuniformities from an earlier universe from which ours descends However, IANAP. Get someone with a clue to chime in on this.

The answer I've always heard was that the overwhelming majority of matter in the universe was annihilated in the big bang, and there was an infintessimal amount more matter than antimatter, and because of that the majority of what was left over from that explosion is matter.

Both of you seemed to have missed something critical from my original statement. Boundary interactions take place between the digital copy and its real life counterpart. In the example regarding your hand, blood flowing into the "portal" via your arteries would be transformed into virtual blood. Similarly, blood which enters the simulation's counterpart of the boundary would be reconstructed in the real world as real blood and would be injected by the "portal" back into your real veins. Nerve impluses traveling through your hand would reach your virtual fingertips. If someone in the virtual world were to hand you a ball, you could manipulate it with your virtual hand and sensory information would be relayed back as virtual nerve impulses until they hit the boundary, where they would be retranslated by the quantum constructor/destructor layer and made into real nerve impulses. The point you're missing here is that movement into the digital world occurs in a continuum. It would be impossible for this process to occur without a destructive component because of the boundary interactions between the real and virtual components that are present in such a setup. I'd like to ask you what you think your consciousness is "tied" to in terms of a real-world manifestation. Surely it isn't tied to the specific atoms which make up your brain, because these are constantly being replaced. The virtual auditory cortex on your left side would interact with the right half of your brain as if real. If the simulation is accurate enough, and the constructor/destructor device able to abstract away the boundary conditions, your abilities should not be affected. Any time your body pulls away from the barrier, it would be reconstructed. The electromagnetic force interactions between the real and virtual components of your body would have to be simulated as well. That's why I said it was a quantum constructor/destructor.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/HEALTH/conditions/02/06/cohen.dogcancerdetect/index.html?section=cnn_topstories Wow...

Hmmm, I started a thread on this. Read that and tell me how your consciousness wouldn't be transferred.

By heritage, not nationality

Well, Spice-based programs like Electronics Workbench are good for simulating electronic circuits.

Indeed! I'm just hoping that once maybe one of these theories will pan out under scrutiny.

Heh, saw this on Digg then came here to ask about it. Looks like someone beat me to it. I really like this idea. I've never liked the "loaf of bread" way that Brian Greene described spacetime. To quote Thomas Dolby (or perhaps Thomas L. Friedman) "The world is flat!"

Okay, here’s a thought experiment… Imagine a machine that’s both universal constructor and destructor. An enormous portal that deconstructs anything that touches it, but in the process scans and builds a digital copy of. It simulates what it deconstructs/scans in realtime and the simulation can interact with the copy in the real world as if the two were joined pieces of the same physical object. For example, if you were to stick your hand into it, blood would flow from your arteries into the computer simulation, flow through the capelaries in your virtual hand, then the blood would be reconstructed and flow back into your real veins. Now, imagine that you stuck your head into this machine… Would you die? In a physical form you would cease to exist, your matter devoured and disassembled by the universal constructor/destructor machine. But at the same time a complete computer simulation of your brain lives on inside the computer. And as soon as you pull your head “out” of the simulation and it’s reconstructed, you’re the same as you ever were. What if you stick half of your head, with the machine only gobbling up half your brain. Would you only half die? Imagine sticking half of your body into the machine that your left side existed in the digital world and your right side in the real one. I find many people fear the concept of “downloading” your consciousness into a computer. They feel that the downloaded version would merely be a copy and that it is impossible to “transfer” your consciousness in such a way that you, as the emergent effect of the biochemical operation of your brain, could never be liberated from your body. But if you could transfer your consciousness into a computer in a continuous fashion such as the one I’m describing, to the point where you exist in both physical and digital form and gradually eliminate the physical form and allow the digital form to take on more of the processing of you, I believe you, experientally, would be transferred right along with it. Would I be afraid to walk through such a portal? Certainly. Would I do it? If I felt it were safe enough, then yes. This is a syndicated meme

aguy2, I think your taking this way too seriously. And no, I'm from Colorado

Axiom #1: To get girls takes time and money [math]girls = time * money[/math] Axiom #2: Time is money [math]time = money[/math] Therefore: [math]girls = money^2[/math] Axiom #3: Money is the root of all evil [math]money = \sqrt{evil}[/math] Therefore: [math]girls = \sqrt{evil^2}[/math] From which we can conclude: [math]girls = evil[/math] Q.E.D.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/02/04/syria.cartoon/index.html?section=cnn_topstories Yes, the sh*t is hitting the fan... all this over a little cartoon, WTF?

The same reason The Law of Accelerating Returns is called such and attributed to Kurzweil when really it's just an extrapolation upon the ideas of Moore's Law, Carl Sagan, Alvin Toffler, and others. The idea has been more developed, supported by example, simplified, and clarified from the original model to remove specifics which hamper application to generalized processes. Of course, you don't have to ask me twice about what I thought the truly novel part of The Selfish Gene was (Here's a hint: it has two m's and two e's)

I've never had reason to suspect that our knowledge was incomplete in that respect, no. So what are you saying, that the specific nature of the strong force interactions which hold together the atomic nucleus are presently unknown? This is the first I've heard of it and some more information on the matter would certainly be appreciated.

Wow, nice map of the Internet:

This is pretty crazy... http://itch.com, a search engine that lets you search multiple forums on the internet. I'm seeing a lot of hits on SFN.

Severian, you obviously know more about physics than I do. So why are you asking me, a layman, for an explanation? I've certainly never studied quantum chromodynamics in an academic setting. If you have questions about the strong force, perhaps you should direct them at swansont rather than me. I can only suspect a religiously-derived ulterior motive. Are you saying the strong force doesn't hold together the atomic nucleus? Surely you don't agree with Chick that the strong force is "a desperate theory to explain away truth" and that electromagnetic repulsion should cause an atomic nucleus to blow apart.

Got a link?

I would like to think there's some bizarre kind of memetic symbiosis whereby memes which survive best when spread together "work" to help hasten each others' spread, and that these can amass into huge memeplexes that cause the hosts they infect to seek out and consume the entire memeplex. I've often wondered if such an effect could provide a mechanism for significant coincidences. The movie I <3 Huckabees really clicked with me...

That reminded me of this: (Note: This is a photoshop job. Here's the original)

In that respect his argument is a strawman. And in that respect it's a red herring. Two logical fallacies for the price of one!