Teleportation...

[blike]

I guess this is more of a philosophical thought than it is a scientific thought, but its something I was discussing with an inferior mind earlier today..

 

Lets say we have a machine that reads all the atoms of a person, sends the information over some sort of medium where a machine on the other side reconstructs the atoms with the "blueprint" that came over the line.. Lets also assume that the machine that sent the data deconstructs the original atoms and stores them for later use (another teleportation or something).

 

Two questions:

 

Is this teleportation? Why or why not..

 

Is the "teleported" person the same person as the original? Why or why not.

 

I argued that the teleported person is indistinguishable from the original, and hence is the same person. Same memories, same likes, dislikes, etc. He would even remember stepping into the teleporter.

[M-CaTZ]

Obviously you have mistaken this person who you said was inferior for yourself. First of all its not teleportation because you are CREATING A REPLICA OF THE INDIVIDUAL not the original itself. Even though they might be indistinguishable, the original was still destroyed and you still created a replica. That is Cloning NOT teleporting. Even though the person may have the same everything as the original it doesnt change the fact that its not an original hence its not teleporting.

[blike]

Originally posted by M-CaTZ

First of all its not teleportation because you are CREATING A REPLICA OF THE INDIVIDUAL not the original itself.

 

What is the defining line here? Because its made of different atoms? By that argument you 20 years from now cannot be called the same "you", because the atoms will be different..

[Radical Edward]

this is an interesting point, because quantum mechanically the atoms really are indistinguishable. the other you would think that it was you, but you wouldn't.

[Sayonara]

This is the same question as "Is Tom Riker different to Will Riker?", but with fewer special effects.

[JaKiri]

It depends if consciousness rests in the cells.

[M-CaTZ]

like i said, they may be indistinguishable but that doesnt change the fact that they are different. And you are the same person 20 years from now, because even though your atoms are constantly being replaced it doesnt all happen at once, and you arent DESTROYED and recreated all at the same time!

[blike]

Originally posted by M-CaTZ

And you are the same person 20 years from now, because even though your atoms are constantly being replaced it doesnt all happen at once..

 

So then the criteria for being a different person is that all the atoms cannot be replaced at the same time?

 

If I copy a song, is it still the same song? or a different song?

[JaKiri]

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri

It depends if consciousness rests in the cells.

[Radical Edward]

I just read the relevant chapter of the emperor's new mind again. I would say no, you are not the same person. you would bifuricate immediately like the two halves of the brain appear to do when the corpus collosum is cut.

 

for those of you not in the know, the corpus collosum is a bridge between the two halves of the brain. It was found that for some severe forms of epilepsy, cutting this bridge assisted recovery. some of the side effects are really wierd though, and I don't know if they still do it.

[NavajoEverclear]

M-Catz do you think you have the right to call a big-wig like blike stupid? He like created this site or something-- show a little respect. Forget that : Question Authority! (but trust me i'm a teacher)

 

I don't know if we could ever create a machine that could detect all that atomic stuff to be replicating it--- but i guess you already admitted this falls into philosophical grounds.

 

Yeah if its indistiguishable what's there to argue? Some people just don't understand, so the truthfullness of it shouldn't be the matter at hand.

[JaKiri]

Originally posted by M-CaTZ

like i said, they may be indistinguishable but that doesnt change the fact that they are different

 

How are they different?

 

For things to be different, they have to, you know, differ. ie. be NOT THE SAME.

[blike]

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri

It depends if consciousness rests in the cells.

 

Right, this is where we ended up in our debate.

 

 

But M-CaTz, think of it this way. Our existence lies not within the atoms in our body, but in the properties and interactions of all the atoms in our body. If we were to replace all the carbons in our body with carbons of the exact same properties, we would be the same person. Nothing about us would change. The individual atoms have nothing to do with it, only the properties and interactions between the atoms.

 

If we built a machine that could transfer the properties of our atoms to another set of atoms, we would have effectively teleported.

[JaKiri]

You're replaced every night by an exact replica.

[M-CaTZ]

look, we can look at this from a biological standpoint. You are created from a sperm and egg, your replica, wouldnt be, so there is a difference in how you were created. Also, there are untangible things that arent stored in cells, so there would have to be some difference.

[blike]

Originally posted by M-CaTZ

look, we can look at this from a biological standpoint. You are created from a sperm and egg, your replica, wouldnt be, so there is a difference in how you were created. Also, there are untangible things that arent stored in cells, so there would have to be some difference.

 

The first part of this post is irrelivant, because it can easily be sidestepped and we are still faced with the same issue. Suppose I was cloned into existence.

 

The second part of your post is not debatable, because you would have a difficult time supporting the argument.

[M-CaTZ]

the whole basis of your arguement is self defeating becasue even if other people cant tell the difference, you are clearly stating that there are 2 seperates objects even if they are the same thing, one is being destroyed and another created. hence it doesnt matter if the creation is an exact REPLICA, its not the original even if it is the same as teh original down to the last atom

[blike]

Originally posted by M-CaTZ

the whole basis of your arguement is self defeating becasue even if other people cant tell the difference, you are clearly stating that there are 2 seperates objects even if they are the same thing, one is being destroyed and another created. hence it doesnt matter if the creation is an exact REPLICA, its not the original even if it is the same as teh original down to the last atom

 

I'm arguing that our very existence, who we are, depends on the interactions and properties of atoms, not the actual atoms themselves. Hence, if the properties can be transferred, so is our existence.

[M-CaTZ]

but your NOT transferring, you are replicating which is what my point is.

[KHinfcube22]

I see both your points, and thi problem is confusing. If all parts of your mind where still there, then it would still be you. But it would also be a replica because one could create more than one of you. Now lets say all parts of the mind got "teleported, but the parts of the body were replaced with those of a cat. Then what would the second being be? Would it be the "Fly",(This is refering to an old movie,) or would it be a messed up replica?

[JaKiri]

Originally posted by M-CaTZ

but your NOT transferring, you are replicating which is what my point is.

 

There's no difference between replicating and transferring.

[JaKiri]

Originally posted by M-CaTZ

the whole basis of your arguement is self defeating becasue even if other people cant tell the difference, you are clearly stating that there are 2 seperates objects even if they are the same thing, one is being destroyed and another created. hence it doesnt matter if the creation is an exact REPLICA, its not the original even if it is the same as teh original down to the last atom

 

Me then me three seconds later are still two seperate objects.

[KHinfcube22]

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri

 

Me then me three seconds later are still two seperate objects.

 

I think what M-CaTZ is tryin to get at is that using Blike's machine would be replicating, because we are creating the newer version. When we change naturally with new atoms, that is really transformation, notreplicating or transfering.

[JaKiri]

Originally posted by KHinfcube22

 

I think what M-CaTZ is tryin to get at is that using Blike's machine would be replicating, because we are creating the newer version. When we change naturally with new atoms, that is really transformation, notreplicating or transfering.

 

Empirically it's the same; UNLESS! there is something that isn't dependent on the cells.

[KHinfcube22]

Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri

 

Empirically it's the same; UNLESS! there is something that isn't dependent on the cells.

 

The same or not, the new one is still a replica. Its man made, so it would be artificial in a sense.