mjg223 wrote:
>
> Take, for example, Star Trek style transporter rays. You take me apart, an
> atom at a time, throw the remnants away and reconstruct a copy at a
> distance. In at least an intuitive sense, the copy 'isn't me.' You've
> murdered me, albeit in a peculiarly baroque way.
"reconstruct a copy at a distance"?
Just an FYI, that's not how the fictional "Star Trek" transporter allegedly
works. This distinction was made clear in articles and Science documentaries
about the NOW possible, by way of some German scientists, ability to send
information about an object a distance and then at the other end recreate the
same conditions. However, we are talking about particles here not yet multi
particle units (in the media I saw which may well be dated). They made a big
deal about pointing out that a person sent the "Star Trek" method would be made
of the same matter that had been disintegrated--beamed--then reintegrated.
Whereas the scan copy method would destroy the original and regenerate from the
information an exact copy. Not trying to pass as an expert here or appear to
have an opinion. Just keeping the metaphors straight.
James
-- "Quod de futuris non est determinata omnino veritas" NOSTRADAMUS 15TH Century
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Jul 27 2000 - 14:04:26 MDT