Teleportation (forked from Sci-Fi Anti-G suit design)

Artlav

Aperiodic traveller
Addon Developer
Beta Tester
Joined
Jan 7, 2008
Messages
5,814
Reaction score
869
Points
203
Location
Earth
Website
orbides.org
Preferred Pronouns
she/her
What about disassembling the bodies for the trip?
Upload the crew's minds into a suitable computer, break the bodies up into cells, accelerate at whatever rate the metal can take, reassemble the cells by stored patterns back into crew's bodies, transfer minds back.
Problem solved.
 
No... you just killed the crew and cloned them.

In a way that would be very, very difficult to do.
 
What about disassembling the bodies for the trip?
Upload the crew's minds into a suitable computer, break the bodies up into cells, accelerate at whatever rate the metal can take, reassemble the cells by stored patterns back into crew's bodies, transfer minds back.
Problem solved.

other than it would kill you and essentially create a new clone/copy (a bit like moving a file from one drive to another and deleting the old file) then that might work great... From your perspective it might seem like nothing happened though, your clone would wake up, in your own cells, thinking its you.

that idea is in many ways a startrek matter-transporter (which kills you by disintegration - converting all your particles to data/energy and re-assembling)

if thats the case, why not transmit the data and have a fresh set of cells (store the data of the cells also) waiting to upload your form to... Then you basically have a personal teleporter.

so I think what i'm saying is that if you can do that storage phase and re-integration, then you may as well go the whole hog and assuming you have a pre-built destination (send your spaceship on ahead of you) then there's no need for any part of you to be on board for the journey.
 
No... you just killed the crew and cloned them.

In a way that would be very, very difficult to do.

Why would you kill the originals? Just upload "blueprints", then assemble them at destination. You can even run simulations of their minds during the journey, so they're "in control" as a regular crew would be, and preserve all the memories of originals and the journey itself.
 
Here's the thing: you're destroying yourself and creating a clone.

You can destroy yourself and create two clones. Or three clones. Or seven billion clones.

In this case you're (probably) using the same atoms that you started out with, but in a true teleporter, you're using different atoms (storing them in the buffer for whenever an incoming teleportation arises). Which means the clone is entirely different.

Of course, matter constantly cycles in and out of the body normally, but that's different. That's an ongoing process. This is a distinct destructive event. There's no getting around it: You are destroying the original and creating a new entity. It may be an entity that thinks it's the old entity, but it's still a different entity.

The other issue is how the device works, and the problem isn't necessarily the information storage/processing. You could be able to deal with that, provided a powerful enough computer.

The problem is the actual dissasembly/assembly mechanism. Star Trek just used a glittery light beam, but a real device will actually have to work in reality. And the problem is, people don't like being cut in half. And that's not so much of a problem for the original subject (you're killing that person anyway), but it will be for the recreated entity- because the half-finished clone would be effectively be cut in half (or cut into several pieces, or lacking most tissue, or whatever), and during an ongoing assembly process would easily die.

And the clone(s) will never be identical to the original. The best you can hope for is "sufficiently similar". There's all sorts of minor amounts of rare metals and little atomic differences and stuff that would probably be a pain to replicate.

Why would you kill the originals? Just upload "blueprints", then assemble them at destination. You can even run simulations of their minds during the journey, so they're "in control" as a regular crew would be, and preserve all the memories of originals and the journey itself.

Maybe because these people actually want to travel to another star instead of sending their clones there?

If you're running simulations of their minds (for whatever silly reason) they wouldn't need to be in control anyway. Interstellar spaceflight would mostly be boring.

Just freeze them, put them in special cradles and hope they can sustain the accelerations. There's no reason for cloning people or killing them or running mind games or such silliness.
 
Last edited:
Of course, matter constantly cycles in and out of the body normally, but that's different. That's an ongoing process. This is a distinct destructive event. There's no getting around it: You are destroying the original and creating a new entity. It may be an entity that thinks it's the old entity, but it's still a different entity.

Prove it.

If you ask the new entity, it will tell you that it's the same as the old one. If you ask someone to speak with the new entity, they will tell you that it's the same too. If you ask the old entity... well, you see the problem ;)

Things would change if you didn't destroy the old entity, of course. From their point of view their life would be split in two alternate directions.

Did that even make any sense? :facepalm:
 
And if you destroyed the original and created several new entities?

They cannot all claim to be the original and a single one in the group cannot claim to be the original because all of the individuals in the group are identical.

And even if the new entity(s) are almost exactly identical to the original, you still can't get around the fact that the original was destroyed.

And being destroyed might be a necessity, not just an act of courtesy to the original and the copy.
 
The idea of this is scanning everything in your body, and putting it together somewhere else. But it wouldn't be a quick and rough job: it would be assembled atom by atom. Every chemical process in your brain would remain the same (assuming the job has been done perfectly). You would feel no difference.
 
The idea of this is scanning everything in your body, and putting it together somewhere else. But it wouldn't be a quick and rough job: it would be assembled atom by atom. Every chemical process in your brain would remain the same (assuming the job has been done perfectly). You would feel no difference.

The person that gets assembled would feel no difference. You'd feel getting destructively scanned and disassembled atom by atom.
 
You'd feel getting destructively scanned and disassembled atom by atom and then reappearing somewhere else.

Of course, this is just hypothetical.
 
that idea is in many ways a startrek matter-transporter (which kills you by disintegration - converting all your particles to data/energy and re-assembling)

Well... Canon says that the Star Trek transporter beam doesn't kill you - it just changes the state of every single particle of your body while creating a pattern matrix of it and then moves the particles into the matrix. There is no continuity interruption, as shown in the TNG episode "Realm of Fear", you're conscious during the whole process and from your point of view it's the outside world that is dematerialized.

In Michael Crichton's novel Timeline the time-travel process used (which is actually matter transportation to another universe) involves vaporizing the subject with lasers after the final scanning (there's a preliminary scan to store as much data as possible into computer memory, then they do a final one for differences and transmit in order to speed up the process) but the subject has been reconstructed at the same exact time so it's never really been destroyed anyway. However, the reconstruction is done by another universe where they have the tech to do that. Feels a bit confusing but it's clearer in the novel. And in this case the subject is conscious all the way through, too.

So, if teleportation occurred with you retaining consciousness all the way through, could you say you have "died"?
 
The clone would also likely feel itself spilling all over the flood in a half-assembled state- provided the assembly got that far.

What's not to say that for a brief split second the original feels excruciating pain, being torn apart on the atomic scale, and the copy doesn't remember it?

In that case, Star Trek would probably be the franchise with the most wanton death/destruction/torture ever and nobody would notice...

So, if teleportation occurred with you retaining consciousness all the way through, could you say you have "died"?

Depends. Star Trek has virtually no real science in it and I'm sure the method used in Timeline uses a fair amount of handwavium too, so I'd generally say no...

Also, does it matter? Assuming you could actually teleport a person, the clone would most definitely think it was the original that got zapped and then appeared somewhere else- in other words- it'd think it'd have continuous consciousness, but it's still a clone of someone who is dead (or still alive, I suppose).
 
Last edited:
You are destroying the original and creating a new entity. It may be an entity that thinks it's the old entity, but it's still a different entity.
What's the difference?
 
Uh... the fact that it's a different entity?

A discrete destructive event occured. The old entity doesn't exist anymore; it has been destroyed.

The new entity is only a copy. It may believe it is the original, but then again, you can create billions of copies and they'll all believe that they're the original (when they are, of course, not). What the entity believes doesn't factor into what actually occured.
 
Uh... the fact that it's a different entity?

A discrete destructive event occured. The old entity doesn't exist anymore; it has been destroyed.
You dodged the question.
What's the difference?
Let's assume we created only one copy and original got destroyed.
 
I did not dodge the question. I pointed out that the original entity was destroyed. If the original entity is destroyed, there is definite proof that the copy cannot possibly be the same entity.

If I take an object, scan it into a machine, destroy it, and then use that machine to create an identical object, is that the same object?

Of course not. :facepalm:
 
Last edited:
If you take a file, copy it, and delete the original, will it be the same file?
Of course it will.

Information have no property of instance, so a copy is as good as an original.
And a pattern of atoms is information if we assume atomic-level assembly is possible.

So what difference there is?
 
If you take a file, copy it, and delete the original, will it be the same file?
Of course it will.

Information have no property of instance, so a copy is as good as an original.
And a pattern of atoms is information if we assume atomic-level assembly is possible.

So what difference there is?

The file will be a copy, hence the verb "copy". The same data, sure- the same series of bits, but they'll be different bits.

If I have an orbiter.exe file that states it is from 2009, and I copy it, I have an orbiter.exe file that states it was modified in 2011. They are copies of the same file.

We're not talking about data, we're talking about objects. The human body is an object.

A teapot is also an object. Now, you may regard it- a collection of atoms- as a set of data- but I ask again: if I scan the teapot, destroy the teapot, and then use that info to create a new teapot, is it the same teapot?

It may look the same, it may feel the same, but it isn't the same object.

:threadjacked:
 
Last edited:
Sure, it will be a different object.
But for all intents and purposes it will be the same as the original.
So, what difference does it make?
 
Back
Top