From: Brett Paatsch (paatschb@optusnet.com.au)
Date: Mon Jul 07 2003 - 05:10:46 MDT
Eliezer S. Yudkowsky writes:
> Brett Paatsch wrote:
> >
> > What it the state of the art currently in scanning? Its been my
> > impression that the atomic level granularity of a scan that I
> > imagine to be necessary can only be done by destroying each
> > layer in reading it. Is this the case currently?
>
> It *makes no difference*. The universe doesn't *care* which
> particles you use. The product equivalency notice is guaranteed
> by the basic structure of quantum physics. Two states with two
> bosons interchanged are not just similar states but IDENTICAL
> states - their complex amplitudes add, just like cases where the
> same photon takes two different paths to arrive at the same final
> point.
Ok but, my question was not about *identity* but about the state
of the art in scanning (I am also interested in theoretical limits) in
extracting information from a scan. Would it be possible to scan
the atomic structure of a frozen brain to make a digitized map of
it, *without* destroying the frozen brain in the process such that
a second scan taken from say a different plane of reference would
still be possible?
>
> > It would seem to be a relatively simple exercise to drop a
> > sheeps brain (comparable in size to the human brain into liquid
> > nitrogen) and then see what sort of freezing damage arises
> > givin an indication as to whether the information can be
> > extracted once we have something approaching the scanning
> > technology required. Obviously the data storage requirements
> > are going to be a challenge could we now scan non destructively
> > say any 5 millimetre cube within a frozen sheep brain and
> > store the data?
>
> If you are doing a cryonics revival, you are doing it after the
> Singularity. This is what I meant when I spoke of people being
> killed by underestimating post-Singularity capabilities.
Ok, but I am still interested in whether it is possible (or impossible)
on current understandings of physics to scan at the atomic
level without destroying the original information source.
Heinsenberg etc. Can we at the level required, measure accurately
without changing the source, so as to give ourselves a chance to
re-measure? Or do the laws of physics stop us?
Regards,
Brett Paatsch
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jul 07 2003 - 05:17:48 MDT