starburns

Why would it "be empty"? If we can scan it and determine the position of every atom/molecule (or at least of every cell), and if we know the person's DNA sequence, why couldn't we create a brain that's identical to the one in his/her skull?

Also, what about artificial brains made of, say, silicon? We have artificial hearts? Could we one day transplant artificial brains (i.e. non-biological brains) into patients with brain tumors? Has IBM already helped us get closer to that (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-14574747)?

What technological challenges stand in the way of making molecular assemblers? I mean, what exactly would it entail to generate some sort of nanotechnology that could assemble, from scratch, a car or something? I've heard something about the "fat fingers" and "sticky fingers" problem and something about a debate between Eric Drexler and a professor name Smalley. I'm just wondering if it's possible that we'll, one day, have molecular assemblers. Any thoughts?

We can currently do transplants of lungs, kidneys, livers, etc. if those organs are damaged or diseased. Will we ever be able to do so with brains? I've heard a lot about the possibility of growing replacement organs in vitro or using 3-D printers to create replacement organs. When will we be able to do so with brains? What obstacles lie in the way?

When the LHC was starting up, there were some worries that a collision of two particles could form a bubble of "true vacuum", as opposed to the "metastable vacuum" that the universe is in today. This bubble would then expand outward at the speed of light, annihilating any matter that stood in its way. Studies later found that cosmic ray collisions, both past and present, took place at energies much higher than those that human-made collisions are capable of, which meant that the LHC is safe. However, sooner or later, humans will be able to create collisions that are as powerful as, and eventually more powerful than, naturally occurring collisions. Could one of those collisions set off what's known as the vacuum metastability disaster? In other words, could it be that there's a certain energy barrier that naturally-occurring collisions can't overcome but that human-made collisions could overcome? After all, it's not that far-fetched to think that humanity can create collisions that are more energetic than natural collisions. There are several things we can do better than nature.

Any more feedbac?

Right, but from a quantum mechanical point of view, teleporting information is the same as teleporting the actual atom, since the quantum state is the only thing that really defines the atom, right? In addition, it's not as if quantum mechanics doesn't apply to the real world. For example, just recently, scientists at UCSB were able to observe quantum mechanical behavior in a trillion-atom mechanical resonator. (http://www.nature.com/news/2010/100317/full/news.2010.130.html) This proves that even macroscopic objects obey quantum mechanical laws, right? If so, doesn't that mean that quantum teleportation can be used on macroscopic objects?

http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090122/full/news.2009.50.html

Ignoring the identity question, what's to stop us from scaling up the process of teleporting single atoms to the point where we can teleport entire humans? I've heard Michio Kaku and Anton Zeilinger say we'll soon be quantum teleporting viruses and complex molecules. So won't we eventually be doing the same with humans?

Recently, scientists have succeeded in performing quantum teleportation on individual atoms (at the University of Maryland). According to Michio Kaku and Anton Zeilinger, we'll be able to do the same to complex molecules, and perhaps even viruses, in a few decades. Could the same thing eventually be done on human beings? Now I know the common response is that there's too much information or that it will take too long. But couldn't there be a shortcut we haven't discovered yet? Some scientific discovery or technological advancement? Couldn't superintelligent AI help get it done? Could someone help quantify what exactly would need to be done? For example, how many seconds would the scan time have to be? How much information, in gigabytes, would have to be stored? How quickly would all the information have to be sent?