StringJunky

I don't think it'[s a bad thought experiment for determining and understanding mind/body duality and consciousness, You are reading too much too much into this toy model and not the discussion. You are being too literal about this thought experiment. It's just a vehicle for this discussion for visualising a concept.

If space is just volume, how do reconcile 'quantum foam' or are you intending to make a clear distinction between what GR says and QP says?

OK, I suppose the extremities of a roasting pan with oil in it will be a fair bit hotter. than a 100.

The red dotted line is China's claimed territory. http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-32941829

I'm going to disagree with you. Food contains water, therefore, the pan will be no hotter than 100oC. I can't imagine scalding steam coming off an object that is that temperature in the scenario mentioned. Try a wet cloth against a boiling metal kettle, I bet you don't get scalded by steam; not enough energy transferred quickly enough.

Yes, what it appears to boil down to is that we are programmed machines and that program that is 'you' can be copied/moved around. It's not much different to when DNA replicates: it unzips and the appropriate amino acids attach to the unzipping strands and... voila!... you have two DNA identical molecules. It's a difficult thing to accept because it means we are not, somehow, metaphysically special. I don't like it, but nature couldn't care less what I like. Science is unpalatable sometimes.

If you want to change the world start with the kids... give them the dream. It's too late starting with the adults. That's my 2 penny worth. Kids minds are more receptive and plastic.

Every time you fall asleep your consciousness dies. Cue for a favourite of mine: "How I hate those little slices of Death we call Sleep" - E. A. Poe It doesn't matter if you don't wake up... you will not know you are dead, but your replicant will carry on your life's work. The code that is you still has the potential to increase in size and complexity.

Graham. What are you ontologically; information or the atoms that make up you? My opinion is that you are, ultimately, information.

None, other than SJ1 will have considerable familiarity with what SJ2 is thinking and feeling. Two distinct people are made with identical molecular makeup. The essence I'm trying to get across is that, all we are is code. All copies are valid as me, at the instant thay are made. The universe couldn't care less which one is the real me.

The internal states of the two subjects is identical and, for a short time anyway, their responses to a new situation will fall within the same narrow band,.commensurate with their similar past experience up to that point in time. Responses will diverge with time as they each gain new unique experiences; they will eventually become noticeably different people.

Look at it objectively, from the perspective of a third person. Would they think G2 is G1? Yes, and G2 would carry on like G1 would have done, if he was still around. I am not implying there has been a transfer of 'self' You are just information that has been copied. The idea of self is an emergent property of of all the experiences we've had, embedded in the molecular arrangements of our brain. The one recurring thing, I find when studying the ontology of life and matters relating to it, is you have to get to grips with is the idea of emergence.

To twist your intented meaning slightly: because it is "perfectly common", is why certain places won't allow it. It is perfectly acceptable to do this where I live.

All you are, is the sum total of your experiences recorded in the atoms that make up you. If we copy that arrangement, it is still you. To think any other way would mean that you think we are actually some physically insubstantive corpus residing within a body.

So what is it that makes the original different?

If you copy a dvd of a film, is there any difference between the two? You are the film, not the dvd.

Burhundi, Turkey, Russia, to name 3...even Sepp Blatter can't let go! My Preciousssss! Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

IPboards is propriietary.

Us sceptical Aquarians can see right through rubbish like that.

An idea that I might expect from someone in their low teens; unfettered imagination with no or little knowledge of basic science.

Yes.

An acceptable idea needs to have some attachment to reality as we know it. That idea did not meet site criteria, therefore, it was closed.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banna_virus

The trend is towards carpeting small nuclear bombs to level an area, not one big bomb to do the same ....multiple warheads are harder to take out and more efficient in terms of nuclear material used.

That and Fowler's