59
Is Star Trek’s Warp Drive Possible?
(daily.jstor.org)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2023
59 points (100.0% liked)
Science
12955 readers
67 users here now
Studies, research findings, and interesting tidbits from the ever-expanding scientific world.
Subcommunities on Beehaw:
Be sure to also check out these other Fediverse science communities:
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
As long as we aren't trying to fuck with the transporter technology that kills you and makes another you somewhere else, I'm fine.
But if the another you is undistinguishable at the quantum level... then it's still you (as seen by external observers, and honestly, I could use a break).
If another perfect copy of you existed, you be okay with being killed? That's fucking weird.
The "Ship of Theseus" example is how our bodies work normally, the transporter makes a new you out of separate matter in another place. Nothing implies a transfer of consciousness, just an exact copy of you is there. Of course, I realize that for the purposes of the shows and movies, none of this is a concern, but a real version of this would be ethically fucked up.
In practical terms, the transporter in order to preserve quantum identity, would need to be reproducing you at the same time as it destroys the old you. To be widely accepted by society, it would need to preserve consciousness continuity, so you'd briefly feel being in two places at the same time, then just at the destination.
Now, a power failure mid transfer... wouldn't be pretty.
A transporter that can recreate you with all your memories can also recreate you with new Transporter Corp (R) approved ones. I think I'll pass.
not necessarily. having the transporter means we have figured out how to make exact one to one copy of an object on a molecular level. that doesn't mean we understand how the informations in human brain are organized and that we can change them.
I suggest to you https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0667991
This. Watching this is why I'd never use a Star Trek transporter.
i think while it is interesting philosophical question, in reality we would get used to it quite quickly. every time you get in a car you place lot of trust in people driving in the opposite direction. everyone of them can be drunk or just a moron and every car ride can be your last. and in spite of that we don't really give it a second thought and it usually works out just fine.
Not even close to the same thing. If you create an exact copy of me at a destination, that doesn't make me okay with being disintegrated because another me is at the other end.
are you ok with closing your eyes when you go to sleep? how do you know you weren't replaced during sleep? 😆
Are you suggesting my consciousness can be transferred to another body? Do you think that if an exact copy of you were made in another place, that shooting the first version of you in the face would cause you to suddenly wake up in the other body? I'm not understanding how you think this works.
that makes two of us, i am not really sure what you are trying to say.
your "consciousness" is just a result of biochemical processes in your brain. if you have the ability to create a copy of your body on a molecular level, then that new copy has your consciousnes, your memories, it is you. so if you create new copy and don't destroy the old one, there are now two of you. if you destroy the original, then there is only one of you, possibly in different location.
from the point of view of your copy, it is no different than you going to sleep and then waking up. you have no idea what was going on with your body during the sleep. you simply accept all the memories you have as yours and move on with your day.
"from the point of view of your copy"
This is the problem, the point of view for the original is death. I am dead.
the original pressumably didn't experience any gruesome death, no one is shooting it in the face. you just closed your eyes and then opened them at new location. what is the difference from going to sleep and then waking up?
For the one in the new location its just that, but the person being "teleported" just ceases to be.
no, that person continues to be in the new location
also https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0708771
There's also a Family Guy episode that touches on this issue... but it's less philosophical since neither version realizes the other exists. That and some doubles/originals die in convenient ways.
I'll one up you here
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt0482571/
I believe I have read that it's literally impossible to copy an object's quantum state without destroying it, so in a real sense a transporter that's indistinguishable at a quantum level would be moving you rather than creating a copy and killing the original.
Both are true. Copying a quantum state means moving it from one object to another, which turns the target into the source, and the source into... something else. If we managed to do that at a full body scale, a "you" would appear at a target location, while a bunch of "something else" would be left at the source location.
An external observer would say "you moved", turning a pile of target "something else" into you, and leaving a pile of "something else" at the source. You yourself... well, as long as you don't worry too much, you would also perceive having just moved from source to target.
Still, there remains that pile of "something else" that used to be you at the source location... but as long as everyone, including you, don't decide to call it "a corpse" or "your previous you's remains", everything would be fine.