Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 04-15-2016, 09:12 PM
Senegoid Senegoid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Sunny California
Posts: 14,602
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stranger On A Train View Post
The difference is that you are not just DNA; you are the cumulation of development, environmental influences, and experience. To suggest that we could "transport" a person by recreating their genome sequences is like saying we could transport Notre Dame de Paris to Mars by carving stone and building flying buttresses to the same plans. Sure, it would look something like the famous cathedral as long as you don't examine it too closely, but it isn't the same building by any practical definition. Even breaking down the structure and transporting the materials somehow to a new site isn't going to give you the same object, any more than the London Bridge of Lake Havasu is the same structure as the original bridge built by John Rennie.

Stranger
I see some shades of the Ship of Theseus problem here. In most of this whole discussion, actually.
  #52  
Old 04-15-2016, 09:16 PM
Czarcasm Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Beervania
Posts: 53,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Senegoid View Post
I see some shades of the Ship of Theseus problem here. In most of this whole discussion, actually.
Not really, because in this case the original parts are still there unless they are deliberately destroyed.
  #53  
Old 04-15-2016, 10:08 PM
Stranger On A Train Stranger On A Train is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Manor Farm
Posts: 16,621
It's even more distant than that. The "Ship of Theseus" paradox posits the identification of an object as such when parts of a whole are replaced; as more are replaced, the whole is less composed of parts of the original, to the point that it may be the form without any original components. In the case of "matter transportation", the body is replicated in toto, the fidelity of which is limited to the amount of information that can be processed and transmitted, and the lmitation of the process reproducing it. In the case of Notre Dame, the Martian copy is made to the same pattern, but not of the same material, nor will it have the same characteristics flaws and intrinsic differences. It is in no way the same structure and more than one tract home is the other, even though they may be built to the same floorplan.

Stranger
  #54  
Old 04-15-2016, 11:41 PM
Trinopus Trinopus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 22,851
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stranger On A Train View Post
The difference is that you are not just DNA . . .
You make a jump too far. I didn't say that scanning and duplicating DNA was the same as scanning and duplicating a person. I said, "When it comes to a DNA molecule, what's the difference." You immediately addressed the question, "When it comes to a man, what's the difference" -- which I didn't ask.
  #55  
Old 04-16-2016, 08:59 AM
DesertDog DesertDog is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Mesa, Ariz.
Posts: 3,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stranger On A Train View Post
Even breaking down the structure and transporting the materials somehow to a new site isn't going to give you the same object, any more than the London Bridge of Lake Havasu is the same structure as the original bridge built by John Rennie.
That's more true than you might think. While the granite blocks on the surface were numbered and put into their original positions, they're just a façade on a concrete structure. The stones of the interior were also transported but sawn into one-inch cubes to be sold or given away as souvenirs.
  #56  
Old 04-16-2016, 09:41 AM
Lumpy Lumpy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota US
Posts: 15,631
You guys are thinking too classically. There is a conceivable method of teleportation, although it bears little resemblance to the Star Trek method. It goes like this:

First, let's postulate a Brobdingnagianly huge what-if: that some way exists to place a macroscopic object, like a human being, in a state of quantum superposition. In this (presumably extremely well protected from interaction with the environment) state the thing to be teleported exists as a wave-function of probabilities like Schrödinger's cat. The teleportation device then consists of two chambers linked by, essentially, a pipe. Person goes into one chamber, becomes a wave-function, which starts out as having 100% probability of existing in the source chamber and 0% probability in the destination chamber. The wave function is then "smeared out" between the two chambers, then shifted so that the probabilities become 0% at the source and 100% percent at the destination. We then assume that the person can be safely decohered at the destination and step out of chamber two. This may strike some as less like teleportation and more like squeezing someone unharmed through a pipe, but we probably could do it now for single atoms or perhaps small molecules, and it would be either light-speed or at least very very fast transport.

This form of teleportation is featured in many of Larry Niven's science fiction stories; or for that matter, the Flue Network in the Harry Potter stories.
  #57  
Old 04-16-2016, 10:33 AM
Little Nemo Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 75,129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
This "information" you talk about: are we still talking about transporting the original from point A to point B, or creating a perfect copy at point B using information about the original?
I'm not sure if you're asking a question about technology or philosophy.

If it's technology, my answer is that I'm staying within the topic. I'm talking about a Star Trek style transporter; a device that disintegrates you at one location and reassembles you at a different location. So there's never more than one of you in existence.

If you're asking a philosophy question, something about whether you're still the same person after undergoing such a process, then I feel that's beyond the scope of the thread.
  #58  
Old 04-16-2016, 11:10 AM
Czarcasm Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Beervania
Posts: 53,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
I'm not sure if you're asking a question about technology or philosophy.

If it's technology, my answer is that I'm staying within the topic. I'm talking about a Star Trek style transporter; a device that disintegrates you at one location and reassembles you at a different location. So there's never more than one of you in existence.

If you're asking a philosophy question, something about whether you're still the same person after undergoing such a process, then I feel that's beyond the scope of the thread.
I'm asking a technical question: Is your process transportation, or is it destruction/duplication?
  #59  
Old 04-16-2016, 12:27 PM
cmyk cmyk is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Mitt
Posts: 14,067
In the Star Trek style of teleportation, the technical explanation is quite simple really.

The person being teleported is put in a state of quantum homeostasis, a field that brings all matter to a stop, for a few seconds using a Schrödinger phase field transducer. This allows the sub-matter scan to make a full analysis of all subatomic states to store in the ships matter-buffer. Beforehand, a vector in spacetime has been pinpointed relative to the ship, and all matter within the buffer is transported through subspace to its final destination, where is can then be safely restored, verified and the Schrödinger phase field transducer shut down.

QED.

We've made no headway on this, because none of that makes any sense.

Last edited by cmyk; 04-16-2016 at 12:29 PM.
  #60  
Old 04-16-2016, 12:47 PM
Stranger On A Train Stranger On A Train is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Manor Farm
Posts: 16,621
Of course, nor does transporting parties of crewmen into often hazardous situations and hostile environments rather than sending a remotely operated or autonomous probe. In fact, by the time of the New Generation show, the computer appears to exhibit sufficient artificial general intelligence (e.g. understanding natural language as well as a person, performing complex analysis give very vague criteria, navigating routes, self-diagnostics, et cetera) that there is really no apparent need for a human crew at all except to interpret data or perform specific scientific obserations. It seems more likely that the crew of the USS Enterprise aren't the best and brightest of the Star Fleet, but more likely untreatable ADHD sufferers and social malcontents which were shipped off to interstellar space on a vessel that provides their every need including stimulation in the form of hazards and plot commplications.

Stranger
  #61  
Old 04-16-2016, 12:52 PM
Little Nemo Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 75,129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
I'm asking a technical question: Is your process transportation, or is it destruction/duplication?
I don't think I understand your question. If you're putting aside the philosophical issue, what is the distinction you're placing between the two?
  #62  
Old 04-16-2016, 02:15 PM
Czarcasm Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Beervania
Posts: 53,318
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
I don't think I understand your question. If you're putting aside the philosophical issue, what is the distinction you're placing between the two?
One is taking Grandmother's homemade apple pie from her her house to her grandson's house as promised. The other is not being able to take Grandmother's homemade apple pie to her grandson's house as promised because you dropped it, so you take the same ingredients and, using the same recipe, recreate the pie and present it to grandson as if it were the same pie that Grandmother made.

Last edited by Czarcasm; 04-16-2016 at 02:16 PM.
  #63  
Old 04-16-2016, 04:49 PM
Trinopus Trinopus is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 22,851
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
I'm asking a technical question: Is your process transportation, or is it destruction/duplication?
As noted, at this point in time, it's a philosophical question.

If we actually had a working transporter, we could address it scientifically, but we don't, so it has to remain an abstract question which we can't answer now.

In threads here on the SDMB, there have been advocates for both interpretations. It comes down to a question of definitions and language.
  #64  
Old 04-17-2016, 12:06 AM
DWMarch DWMarch is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Nanaimo, BC
Posts: 1,964
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmyk View Post
In the Star Trek style of teleportation, the technical explanation is quite simple really.

The person being teleported is put in a state of quantum homeostasis, a field that brings all matter to a stop, for a few seconds using a Schrödinger phase field transducer. This allows the sub-matter scan to make a full analysis of all subatomic states to store in the ships matter-buffer. Beforehand, a vector in spacetime has been pinpointed relative to the ship, and all matter within the buffer is transported through subspace to its final destination, where is can then be safely restored, verified and the Schrödinger phase field transducer shut down.

QED.

We've made no headway on this, because none of that makes any sense.
The device you're describing is called the Heisenberg compensator. I don't know what it looks like but I believe it is painted "Skyler" white.

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/H...rg_compensator
  #65  
Old 04-17-2016, 12:33 AM
Little Nemo Little Nemo is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 75,129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
One is taking Grandmother's homemade apple pie from her her house to her grandson's house as promised. The other is not being able to take Grandmother's homemade apple pie to her grandson's house as promised because you dropped it, so you take the same ingredients and, using the same recipe, recreate the pie and present it to grandson as if it were the same pie that Grandmother made.
Then this seems like a philosophical issue not a technical one. You put a person in one end of the machine and they get transmitted to the other; that's the technical process. If you want to discuss whether the process kills off the person and replaces him with a duplicate, that's a philosophical issue.
  #66  
Old 04-17-2016, 03:32 AM
Mijin Mijin is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 7,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trinopus View Post
If we actually had a working transporter, we could address it scientifically, but we don't, so it has to remain an abstract question which we can't answer now.

In threads here on the SDMB, there have been advocates for both interpretations. It comes down to a question of definitions and language.
We've debated at length all these things in the other thread: it's disputed that building a functioning transporter would in itself answer the philosophical question, and that it's merely a question of definitions and language.

Stating this kind of opinion matter-of-factly here is a hijack.
  #67  
Old 04-17-2016, 10:45 AM
Lumpy Lumpy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota US
Posts: 15,631
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumpy View Post
You guys are thinking too classically. There is a conceivable method of teleportation, although it bears little resemblance to the Star Trek method. It goes like this:

First, let's postulate a Brobdingnagianly huge what-if: that some way exists to place a macroscopic object, like a human being, in a state of quantum superposition. In this (presumably extremely well protected from interaction with the environment) state the thing to be teleported exists as a wave-function of probabilities like Schrödinger's cat. The teleportation device then consists of two chambers linked by, essentially, a pipe. Person goes into one chamber, becomes a wave-function, which starts out as having 100% probability of existing in the source chamber and 0% probability in the destination chamber. The wave function is then "smeared out" between the two chambers, then shifted so that the probabilities become 0% at the source and 100% percent at the destination. We then assume that the person can be safely decohered at the destination and step out of chamber two. This may strike some as less like teleportation and more like squeezing someone unharmed through a pipe, but we probably could do it now for single atoms or perhaps small molecules, and it would be either light-speed or at least very very fast transport.

This form of teleportation is featured in many of Larry Niven's science fiction stories; or for that matter, the Flue Network in the Harry Potter stories.
I just thought of a couple of caveats: In order to avoid the various conservation problems of just how did a person's worth of mass vanish from Chamber A, you would have to balance the transfer by using a counterweight mass (see Terry Pratchett's Interesting Times). This leads to the question of are you really "transporting" someone, or are you using their information to turn, say, a block of iron into a person, and vice-versa. Also since no process can be 100% efficient, even a tiny portion of a person's mass-energy equivalent would be equal to a hydrogen bomb's worth of energy that has to be expended each time. I don't think you could ever trust such a technology around anything fragile- like cities or small countries.
  #68  
Old 04-17-2016, 10:56 AM
cmyk cmyk is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: The Mitt
Posts: 14,067
Quote:
Originally Posted by DWMarch View Post
The device you're describing is called the Heisenberg compensator. I don't know what it looks like but I believe it is painted "Skyler" white.

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/H...rg_compensator
And I just pulled that out of my butt. That is eerily close to what I described.
  #69  
Old 04-18-2016, 10:39 AM
MacLir MacLir is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 543
In reference to several comments on the subject:

In his books (Way Station is the one I'm recalling), Clifford Simak used a transportation system in which the station had chemicals on hand. Bodies were assembled from the raw materials to hold the transferred consciousness. Transfer out left a dead body which was recycled into chemical components.

Last edited by MacLir; 04-18-2016 at 10:40 AM. Reason: Typo
  #70  
Old 04-18-2016, 11:29 PM
Lemur866 Lemur866 is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Middle of Puget Sound
Posts: 21,059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
I'm talking about a Star Trek style transporter; a device that disintegrates you at one location and reassembles you at a different location. So there's never more than one of you in existence.
Tell that to Thomas Riker and Tuvix.
  #71  
Old 04-28-2016, 07:31 PM
Grestarian Grestarian is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Garage & Lab
Posts: 1,232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Czarcasm View Post
But that's only half of the entire question, though: The premise is that which is left behind is destroyed to make room for the new creation. Does the original lose all human rights if it is to be killed once the copy is made? Does the original lose all human rights if the original is to be killed before the copy is completed?
Every time this transporter question comes up in a thread I try to pose this question or a variation of it: If you claim that the transporter-created copy is, to all intents and purposes, you once it arrives at the intended destination, if there were a slight glitch and the original you weren't instantly dissipated during the original action would you be willing to to be taken off to a small room and be killed? No one who has claimed that the copy is just the same as the original has ever replied back.
I believe this question was explored in The Prestige [Jackman, Bale, Caine, Bowie, et al.]

--G!
  #72  
Old 04-28-2016, 08:03 PM
sweat209 sweat209 is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,522
Quote:
Originally Posted by nansbread View Post
Since the phrase was used for the first time on Star Trek have we taken any step in the direction of it becoming a reality. Even the tinest little advancement to beam a person from one place on earth to another place on earth. Lets stay on this planet for this question.

Lets have the dope then.
Star trek has a scanner sorta of like an MRI but way way way better it scan so much detail yes so much detail all the way down to cells, molecules and atoms!! We have no scanner on earth any where close to that detail.

It than kills you and destroys you so called a dematerialization. It than rematerialization making a copy of you!!! So even if we had this technology that can do that no one would sign up.

A persons memory, experience, character and what makes up you was part of energy or soul it would not better killing you and just sending the life force energy and than remaking you body.

But unfortunately a person memory, experience, character and what makes up you is part of your brain. Otherwise we would not have diseases like dementia, Alzheimer's, Brain injuries and other diseases that effect the brain.

So unfortunately science today points we have no life force energy. So things like portals ( Well I love playing video games and steeping into portal and coming out some where else in game) cannot exit in real life.

No one would sign up for portal trip or transporter where there is dematerialization and rematerialization.

If there was way to go through a portal, stargate or use of transporter with out use of dematerialization or rematerialization by bending and folding space time and not killing you aka as dematerialization than you may get people to sign up.

Last edited by sweat209; 04-28-2016 at 08:03 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:43 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2017 Sun-Times Media, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017