• Teleportation Dilemma
    209 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Snorkel;17041349]Wormholes are more likely in my opinion. Bending space to create a "door" atleast doesn't kill you by dismantling.[/QUOTE] Is that one of those things that can destroy the universe?
If you can recreate the person, couldnt you just create people?
[QUOTE=JohnEdwards;17026200]they have been able to teletport a grain of salt in finland .001 inches, living things I doubt we will get it that far[/QUOTE] How the fuck?
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYCZo0O3H0g[/media]
[QUOTE=Beafman;17029306]We might find a method, while Einsteins theory is indeed the current rule we hold true, there are future theories that might do that we can travel faster then time.[/QUOTE] You can't travel faster than light in spacetime, you can only skip distances by e.g. bending spacetime. - Which wouldn't make you travel faster than the speed of light - Just skip distances. [editline]10:05AM[/editline] [QUOTE=sltungle;17039427]The major problem isn't that computers can't handle the information, but that obtaining 100% of the information of every particle in a persons body is a PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITY. Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, bitches.[/QUOTE] Both is a problem. I know no current computer which can handle 10^23+ particles (100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000+) and there will never be a computer able to do this in realtime (which is necessary). But yes, Heisenberg is the other problem. [editline]10:08AM[/editline] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;17039539]As for computers, every year a new technology is revealed. Quantum computing is on the brink, 20 years from now, it will be a likely reality. If Quantum computers exist, the data storage problem is gone. The rest of it.. that's still an issue.[/QUOTE] Quantum computers are to be developed in 20 years for 20 years now. And they will only be useable for doing mathematical jobs like factorising a large number (to break RSA for example). They will only work in really special cases. [editline]10:30AM[/editline] [QUOTE=Awesomecaek;17040450]2. We will soon have capacity to scan human body to degree that we will be able to make an whole digital model of it. Computers are a whole lot more powerful than you thing, and no, you don't need to scan every atom separately to make an perfect copy[/quote] No. One cube of SUGAR contains 10^23 atoms. Every of these atoms have around 6 electrons (Carbon). Every electron is defined by at least 3 quantum numbers (n,l,s) and probable coupling to other electrons (j,F) and magnetic substructure (m_l,m_j,m_s,m_F). So we have around 9 more data-points to be stored. Then we need the electrons "velocity" and "position" (in quantum manner): 6 more data-points for every degree of freedom. Let's asume, it's the same for the protons and neutrons (which contain once more quarks and gluons - Three for each). Number-of-Atoms*(Number-of-Electrons + Number-of-Quarks + Number-of-Gluons)*(Number-of-Quantum-Numbers + velocity/location-coordinates) = 10^23*(6 + 12*3 + 12*3)*(9 + 6) = 1,170*10^23 = 1.170*10^25. For one cube of sugar. Now lets asume, one cube of sugar weigths 10g. A human weights around 75 kg. This means we need 7500 the amount of data: 1.170*10^25*7500 = 8775*10^25 = 8.775*10^28 Written out, this is [B]87,750,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000[/B] piece of information which need to be stored. The fastest super computer currently has a power of 1105 TFLOPS (Floatingpoint operations per second) This is written out 1105 *10^12 operations in the second or 1,105,000,000,000,000. To handle the data of a human body, it would need 7.94117647*10^13 seconds. This are 2,58179114*10^6 years. [B]This are 2,48 million years.[/B] Expecting the power of a computer doubling it's power every two years (Moore's law), we are ready to handle these data within one second in about 92.348836 years. But even today, we see Moore's law is not entirely correct and we will soon come to a border where increasing the speed will not follow this law anymore. I expect computer's power-increase to stagnate in around 50 years. At least no doubling. Not to forget, we also need a scanner which is that fast - not only a computer. And this scanner is bound to physical limits such as Heisenberg.
[quote] No. One cube of SUGAR contains 10^23 atoms. Every of these atoms have around 6 electrons (Carbon). Every electron is defined by at least 3 quantum numbers (n,l,s) and probable coupling to other electrons (j,F) and magnetic substructure (m_l,m_j,m_s,m_F). So we have around 9 more data-points to be stored. Then we need the electrons "velocity" and "position" (in quantum manner): 6 more data-points for every degree of freedom. Let's asume, it's the same for the protons and neutrons (which contain once more quarks and gluons - Three for each). Number-of-Atoms*(Number-of-Electrons + Number-of-Quarks + Number-of-Gluons)*(Number-of-Quantum-Numbers + velocity/location-coordinates) = 10^23*(6 + 12*3 + 12*3)*(9 + 6) = 1,170*10^23 = 1.170*10^25. For one cube of sugar. Now lets asume, one cube of sugar weigths 10g. A human weights around 75 kg. This means we need 7500 the amount of data: 1.170*10^25*7500 = 8775*10^25 = 8.775*10^28 Written out, this is [B]87,750,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000[/B] piece of information which need to be stored. The fastest super computer currently has a power of 1105 TFLOPS (Floatingpoint operations per second) This is written out 1105 *10^12 operations in the second or 1,105,000,000,000,000. To handle the data of a human body, it would need 7.94117647*10^13 seconds. This are 2,58179114*10^6 years. [B]This are 2,48 million years.[/B] Expecting the power of a computer doubling it's power every two years (Moore's law), we are ready to handle these data within one second in about 92.348836 years. But even today, we see Moore's law is not entirely correct and we will soon come to a border where increasing the speed will not follow this law anymore. I expect computer's power-increase to stagnate in around 50 years. At least no doubling.[/QUOTE] Ohoho, but we don't need to do that! For example every molecule of water is the same. IE - you will reduce information for every water molecule from 3 atoms with electron fields to 1 single particle. Then let's say you will reset the speeds of particles, because, you don't really need to teleport the object moving - you will get rid of speed informations. Maybe you could just set up general temperature information for whole grams of matter, because the temperatures in many places of body are the same for big chunks of matter, or the matter (body tissues) can take some temperature changes without problem - huge spare of information. I am pretty sure that when teleporting human, you could go into scanning positions and relations of whole proteins and you still wouldn't be able to see difference between the imput and output, and this system this simple is nothing unbelievable. I agree that your calculations might be right, but you are trying to prove there are problems, which don't really have to care about, because, to a degree, they don't really matter.
[QUOTE=aVoN;17041835]Both is a problem. I know no current computer which can handle 10^23+ particles (100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000+) and there will never be a computer able to do this in realtime (which is necessary). But yes, Heisenberg is the other problem..[/QUOTE] I meant it more in terms of... well, because of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle we'll never get to a point at which EXACT replication of quantum states is possible, so it's pointless to even go on the search for a way to create a device capable of storing data that can't be obtained in the first place. Of course no such device exists.
Well that's why we have stargates. :v:
We have stargates :V:
Whoa all this dying stuff is creepy. Would 'you' be 'in control' of the body that comes out the other side?
Wormholes are the answer my good friend. [editline]01:00PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Picklez;17042886]Whoa all this dying stuff is creepy. Would 'you' be 'in control' of the body that comes out the other side?[/QUOTE] That's what I don't like about the idea. It wouldn't really be you on the otherside, it would be someone exactly the same as you. When you go in, you basically go to sleep permanently (yes, die) and someone exactly the same as you is on the otherside, but you're not seeing through their eyes, because you are dead.
If every particle changed depending on which position it takes in space then we would just need to change all the "spacial configuration" of these particles. Another method would be analizing what movement is and if it's composed of infinitely small teletransportations (thus solving zeno's arrow paradox and the half way paradox). If it appears to be truth that movements is composed of infinitely small teletransportations then it would be a question of making these teletransportations not so infinitely small. The cloning method described by the OP would need to replicate the exact position of every electron in our brain to make us feel consious. It's also morally wrong because you would go to get teleported, sit somewhere, wait, get told teletransportation is complete and then get killed without feeling you are alive somewhere else. If you teletransport someone to the same room they would actually say, think and feel the exact same things but non of them and both of them would be clones at the same time. They both have self consiousness thus it's morally wrong to kill any of them. This method is stupid because the original you doesn't live getting teletransported somewhere and the cloned you doesn't live the process of teletransportation. This sort of proves the existance of the soul as both, you and your clone have exactly the same thoughts and experiences and personality but you don't share consiousness, you can't swap being alive from one body to another thus there must be something different.
[QUOTE=Derp_Alt;17026666]I was thinking more about something like pipes in which space is compressed, making you fit in a small tube. Then we'd just need some kind of gravity along these pipes to accelerate us. That wouldn't be exactly teleportation and can not be used anywhere but it will probably be the nearest we can get.[/QUOTE] Only if they Were green and when you stood on them they went "du du du"
Teleportation is stupid. Yes, it is. Take this into consideration: let's say it's possible to take all the data and transport it and let's say we want to transport cargo. How about we just create it on spot? Making it somewhere and then using totally impractical ways of transportation is just stupid. Rather take the "receiving" machine's technology and change it into a molecular CNC maker of anything. Something a lot more practical would be portal-like wormholes (or whatever they are).
[QUOTE=The DooD;17042924]That's what I don't like about the idea. It wouldn't really be you on the otherside, it would be someone exactly the same as you. When you go in, you basically go to sleep permanently (yes, die) and someone exactly the same as you is on the otherside, but you're not seeing through their eyes, because you are dead.[/QUOTE] Unless you're the version of "you" that comes out, in which case it would feel simply like you changed locations suddenly. [editline]11:22AM[/editline] But to theorize effectively about the effects on your consciousness, you'd first need a solid understanding of what exactly that is, and even now it's very hard to define what exactly makes you self-aware and conscious.
The binary code reminded me this. [img]http://theinfosphere.org/images/thumb/8/87/BBSp2.jpg/800px-BBSp2.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=The Epidemic;17027418]And if a glitch or something happened and it didn't create the clone properly, you're screwed.[/QUOTE] Well, if somebody fucks up with brain surgery, you're fucked too, but people still do it (bad example because most of the time they have to or they'll die :v:) [editline]03:32PM[/editline] [QUOTE=kevin :/;17045057]The binary code reminded me this. [img]http://theinfosphere.org/images/thumb/8/87/BBSp2.jpg/800px-BBSp2.jpg[/img][/QUOTE] I watched that 2 days ago.. ZERO ONE ONE ZERO ZERO ZERO ONE ONE ZERO ONE ZERO ONE ONE ZERONEZERONEZERERERONOEOROEROEOEROERRRRRRRRRRR
[QUOTE=The Epidemic;17027418]And if a glitch or something happened and it didn't create the clone properly, you're screwed.[/QUOTE] Well, assuming you are able to read that data, keep it an a cache large enough, this shouldn't be a problem... Just deconstruct the new copy, and try again :P If you use the same atoms as the original, you don't die, and you don't need to analyze EACH atom's many properties, just location. Just move them, perhaps on a [B]neutrino carrier[/B], and place them like legos.Why Neutrinos? They travel near C, and they pass through most matter. If there was a Lightyear long slab of Lead, half of them would pass. Neutriono penetration is much more successful than that of even Gamma rays. And besides, how do you attach rays to atoms? You can't. Why the number 159,382 OP? :P
[QUOTE=Minorkos;17026647][IMG]http://www.emovietalk.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/the_prestige.jpg[/IMG] Hmm[/QUOTE] hah. first thing i thought as soon as i read the first post.
[QUOTE=Pixelbanana;17026171][u]This is how teleportation would hypothetically work.[/u] [img]http://img33.imageshack.us/img33/7873/graphic1copy.png[/img] 1. Every aspect of a persons body is analyzed. 2. It is put into data. 3. That data is transported. 4. The person is reconstructed in another place using the data. [u]This is why teleportation is practically impossible.[/u] 1. Analyzing every single aspect of a person's data produces such an enormous amount of data, that no modern computer can handle it. No computer for the next 100 years will probably be able to handle it. 2. Although the materials needed for reconstructing a person (electrons, protons, and neutrons) are always present, we will probably never have the technology to manipulate them with such precision. [u]The big dilemma.[/u] As you notice, teleportation produces two people. Both of these people are you, down to the last detail. In order to compensate for the usage of surrounding air (or whatever material is used) to create the person in the other location, the original person needs to be broken up into the used material, or in other words, zappy-gun'd. In the process of teleportation, you die, and nobody is able to tell. Just wanted to share that with you guys.[/QUOTE] Wouldn't your memories be gone when you're reconstructed?
[QUOTE=cmanatlan;17045578]Wouldn't your memories be gone when you're reconstructed?[/QUOTE] no. All memories are are electrical connections (axons) between neurons. Those positions, charges, and other properties would be copied, Just as a Hard Drive or CD's "Memories" are written by polarity or burns. Electrical Connections are just another way of encoding this information. Our brains, like computers also work in binary. Connected/not connected, Firing/not firing, N/S, Dimple/No Dimple, etc. A computer's equivilant of a neuron is a transistor, except it doesn't reconnect.
If our race doesn't die, I think in far future we will be able to do it after all. There's still so much unexplored. Whole space is still unknown to us. Maybe only our galaxy has such limits...
Imagine if we had the technology to replicate things atom for atom. You could do physical pirating :v: (the non-stealing-shit-on-the-seas kind).
[QUOTE=sltungle;17042214]I meant it more in terms of... well, because of the Heisenberg uncertainty principle we'll never get to a point at which EXACT replication of quantum states is possible, so it's pointless to even go on the search for a way to create a device capable of storing data that can't be obtained in the first place. Of course no such device exists.[/QUOTE] Yes, I got your point. Heisenberg is more a limitation than computers are.
[QUOTE=noctune9;17045756]Imagine if we had the technology to replicate things atom for atom. You could do physical pirating :v: (the non-stealing-shit-on-the-seas kind).[/QUOTE] You know atoms need to be gotten from somewhere anyway
[QUOTE=kevin :/;17045057]The binary code reminded me this. [url]http://theinfosphere.org/images/thumb/8/87/BBSp2.jpg/800px-BBSp2.jpg[/url][/QUOTE] That's a Fry-Hole/Hawkin-Hole, right?
[QUOTE=johanz;17045770]You know atoms need to be gotten from somewhere anyway[/QUOTE] For biological matter, just use dung. For others, you just have stores of major elements, and pull from them :D Sort of like a 3D printer, but cooler. Neutrino carrier would still be the best way in my book. Still, I don't believe we have a way of capturing them or attaching them to items as of yet.
[QUOTE=implaying8;17045484]If you use the same atoms as the original, you don't die, and you don't need to analyze EACH atom's many properties, just location.[/QUOTE] Yes, for this, you don't need to analyze anything. To move the same atoms, you have to move the whole body. This is, what happens when you walk or drive a car (or go through a wormhole) [QUOTE=implaying8;17045484]Just move them, perhaps on a [B]neutrino carrier[/B], and place them like legos. Why Neutrinos? They travel near C, and they pass through most matter. If there was a Lightyear long slab of Lead, half of them would pass.[/QUOTE] Now you speak about teleporation by modulation a carrier. For this, you need to get the data of the atoms first. No way around this. And you can't use the same atoms for this method. And Neutrinos are really inconvenient. [b]Because[/b] of them not/hardly interacting with matter, it is also hard to first modulate the data-stream and of course reading it again. Better take proven technologies like light. [QUOTE=implaying8;17045484]And besides, how do you attach rays to atoms? You can't.[/quote] What do you want to tell us with this? If it is, what I think you mean ("attaching the atoms to your neutrino-carrier") then all you post is totally contradicting.
a better way would be to deconstruct the object into a string of atoms, and shoot them along a tube. data would also have to be sent regarding the order of deconstruction for reconstruction. without a doubt, this could not be done without (a lot of) quantum computing.
But you would STILL die in the process.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.