JaKiri Posted July 6, 2003 Share Posted July 6, 2003 Originally posted by KHinfcube22 The same or not, the new one is still a replica. Its man made, so it would be artificial in a sense. For all intents and purposes it's the same object though; it's like spending time arguing that, say, my copy of The Way of the Weasel wasn't ACTUALLY the one written by Scott Adams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHinfcube22 Posted July 6, 2003 Share Posted July 6, 2003 Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri For all intents and purposes it's the same object though; it's like spending time arguing that, say, my copy of The Way of the Weasel wasn't ACTUALLY the one written by Scott Adams. Andyour copy is not the original, its replica of the original. Its just as you said, a copy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted July 6, 2003 Share Posted July 6, 2003 Originally posted by KHinfcube22 Andyour copy is not the original, its replica of the original. Its just as you said, a copy. But would you have an argument about it being so? I KNOW ITS A COPY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHinfcube22 Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Thus Blikes machine is not teleporting the person, but replicating him/her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Originally posted by KHinfcube22 Thus Blikes machine is not teleporting the person, but replicating him/her. And destroying the original, thus is effectively the same as teleportation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri And destroying the original, thus is effectively the same as teleportation. That's what teleportation is, in fact. Destruction and recreation. Anybody who has illusions that the matter is magically moved through the power of pixie dust is living in la-la happy elf land. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 They're working on the 'Charlie and the Chocolate Factory' model of teleportation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri They're working on the 'Charlie and the Chocolate Factory' model of teleportation. Ah yes, la-la happy Oompa Lumpa land. Similar to la-la happy elf land but with more focus on pushing the boundaries of confectionary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 I meant the 'things on television are broken up into lots of little tiny pieces and sent through the air' etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri I meant the 'things on television are broken up into lots of little tiny pieces and sent through the air' etc. I believe you refer to Wonkavision, Sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Originally posted by Sayonara³ I believe you refer to Wonkavision, Sir. I do indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted July 7, 2003 Share Posted July 7, 2003 Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri I do indeed. Let you use that as an academic source at Cambridge do they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M-CaTZ Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 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. Thank you, thats exactly what im saying. And teleporting is transferring atoms not recreating them, there is a difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blike Posted July 8, 2003 Author Share Posted July 8, 2003 Originally posted by M-CaTZ Thank you, thats exactly what im saying. And teleporting is transferring atoms not recreating them, there is a difference. You're arguing that because its not the same atoms, its not the same person, correct? We can both agree however that individual atoms in the body will change and be replaced over time, yet you will still be the same person. Hence, you cannot base your argument on the premise that because they are different atoms, it is a different person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M-CaTZ Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 I am saying there is a difference between a gradual natural replacement of cells and a complete synthetic replacement, and my main point is that recreating is not the same as transferring! is it that hard to understand? BTW Navajo YOU SHUTUP! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 Originally posted by Sayonara³ Let you use that as an academic source at Cambridge do they? Not so much let. It's required reading for the Natural Sciences I'll have you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 Originally posted by M-CaTZ And teleporting is transferring atoms not recreating them, there is a difference. No. Destroying and recreating the atoms is the method of transfer. If you want to use some sort of magical fantasy teleporter to support your argument, you might want to explain how it works. Apart from being very interesting, it may even make your argument defensible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Edward Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 Originally posted by M-CaTZ I am saying there is a difference between a gradual natural replacement of cells and a complete synthetic replacement, and my main point is that recreating is not the same as transferring! is it that hard to understand? BTW Navajo YOU SHUTUP! no no, two electrons are indistinguishable, so if you instantly swap an electron in you with an electron in me, then nothing has changed. so what is the difference with the whole body? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M-CaTZ Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 because there are certain cells and atoms and things that are unique to each individual so there is a difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blike Posted July 8, 2003 Author Share Posted July 8, 2003 Originally posted by M-CaTZ because there are certain cells and atoms and things that are unique to each individual so there is a difference. lol, I think you need to reread everything carefully again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHinfcube22 Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 I get at both sides here. M-CaTZ is saying because its being created, its a replica. But Blikes saying that because the originl is destroyed, and the second is perfectly the first person in everyway, its teleportation. Actually, I just remembered a theory of teleportation, not unlike Blikes. On a video game I play, They completly disintergrate you, reading all of your molecular code, and reintergrate you at the other side. think the game was called Project Turbo Man Journey or something. Teleportation, or Replica, it really depends on how you view it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blike Posted July 8, 2003 Author Share Posted July 8, 2003 "Project Turbo Man Journey" not to get off topic but DANG son that game is ooolllddd!!! I got that game with my first Packard Bell machine, P133MHz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHinfcube22 Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 Originally posted by blike "Project Turbo Man Journey" not to get off topic but DANG son that game is ooolllddd!!! I got that game with my first Packard Bell machine, P133MHz Yah, My first computer had Packard bell. At least my memorys good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sayonara Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 Originally posted by KHinfcube22 They completly disintergrate you, reading all of your molecular code, and reintergrate you at the other side. Teleportation, or Replica, it really depends on how you view it. They are one and the same. That's the point. You can only achieve teleportation by breaking down copy A and using the information to build copy B. There is no other way of doing it without magic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Mattson Posted July 8, 2003 Share Posted July 8, 2003 M-CaTZ, you are getting hung up on a trivial point here. It doesn't even matter whether or not it is appropriate to call this "teleportation". Call it "cloning" or even "faxing" if it makes you feel better, but the problem can still be discussed. Originally posted by MrL_JaKiriEmpirically it's the same; UNLESS! there is something that isn't dependent on the cells. Right-O. Obviously, this can't be settled by argumentation alone. The conclusion that blike reached is based on the materialist assumption that all states of existence are physical states. If that assumption is correct, then you would indeed have an identical mind with the same memories, disposition, etc. And if you made a duplicate without simply destroying the original, then the two would be identical right until the moment the duplicate sensed his new surroundings, because materialism also says that different stimuli result in different brain states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now