Viale

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,650
You've just described the Ship of Theseus, and there really isn't a right or wrong answer.

Yes the teleported person isn't you, but also no it totally is you.

It's no different conceptually that all cells in your body being totally different from the cells you had several years ago. Yet despite not having those same cells you are you, but also not you. You live in the Star Trek transporter dilemma/Ship of Theseus experiment daily (or atleast one half of it). Infact I'd argue that since the transporters make an exact recreation, it's more "you" that your body creating and replacing old cells with new cells over the years. Both scenarios quite literally make up the Ship of Theseus experiment, and there is no real wrong or right answer.


What makes you "you" is continuity of conscious.

Additionally any form of portal that is not an Einstein Rosen bridge, is likely working by deconstructing your body at the origin and reconstructing it at the destination ala Stargate.

I'm not sure why people are using the ship of theseus analogy. It doesn't really fit with what op is saying.

Instead of replacing parts of a ship like theseus or our body replacing cells, this would be like the creation of two different ships with the same blueprint and materials and then bombing one and then claiming they were always the same ship.
 
Last edited:

Rice Eater

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,824
I had this discussion with my co-worker today actually. If the me that is sitting here right now and looking out of my own eyeballs steps into a teleportation machine, closes my eyes, and everything goes blank for good after that then I'm fucking dead. Whatever comes out of the other side doesn't count.
 

dc3k

Member
Feb 10, 2018
692
not america
I want UT's translocator. But I also don't want to explode someone if I throw it too close to them, or explode myself if someone shoots the disc.

I'll walk.
 

Deleted member 1698

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
4,254
I had this discussion with my co-worker today actually. If the me that is sitting here right now and looking out of my own eyeballs steps into a teleportation machine, closes my eyes, and everything goes blank for good after that then I'm fucking dead. Whatever comes out of the other side doesn't count.

Close your eyes. Now open them.

What is the difference? You just moved through time and space. There is a discrete point where the old you stopped existing as your cells replicated and were replaced.

Are you still you? Yes, so don't worry about it, just teleport and have a great holiday.
 

Fat4all

Woke up, got a money tag, swears a lot
Member
Oct 25, 2017
95,638
here
Close your eyes. Now open them.

What is the difference?
AlienatedFrenchKodiakbear-size_restricted.gif
 

Wag

Member
Nov 3, 2017
11,638
Teleportation is fucking scary to me, man.
Like, let's look at Star Trek for a second. You go on the teleportation pod and you basically get erased from reality, deconstructed on a molecular level, and then reconstructed in another place. But the thing is, that's not you, that's not your consciousness. You died the instant you got deconstructed. The teleporation only recreated you elsewhere, an exact copy of you, of your thoughts and memories, an exact copy of your consciousness. Basically a perfect clone of dead and erased person. That's nightmarish imo.

However, if we're able to construct wormholes or portals that you go through like a door, that's much better. No dead you, no copy, you're still alive.
Teleportation is overrated.

Thanks for coming to my TED talk.
I just re-watched all of Stargate everything.

The way the Stargates worked weren't much different from Star Trek's transporters, they still had buffers, and stored backup copies of organic data in each gate before being sent to the destination. They used the buffer in at least one episode to recover someone "lost in transit".
 

Amnesty

Member
Nov 7, 2017
2,704
Close your eyes. Now open them.

What is the difference? You just moved through time and space. There is a discrete point where the old you stopped existing as your cells replicated and were replaced.

Are you still you? Yes, so don't worry about it, just teleport and have a great holiday.
Okay, you step into the disintegration chamber first
 

Imperfected

Member
Nov 9, 2017
11,737
Let me reframe the debate:

Nightcrawler versus Blink.

I don't know what point I was trying to make, here, they're both really cool.
 

texhnolyze

Shinra Employee
Member
Oct 25, 2017
23,494
Indonesia
My first reaction to this is that the devices will be monopolized by the corporates and they'll be charged more money than air travel. So nothing will change.
 

Zom

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,195
Portals aren't always better. Just ask Stephen King
I'm surprised no one has posted this yet, but there's a great 2014 post on Wait But Why that covers this question quite in depth and goes even deeper. What actually makes you you?

It's a bit of a long read but it hooks you in from start to finish.

waitbutwhy.com

What Makes You You? — Wait But Why

What is it that makes you you? Your body? Your brain? The info in your brain? Your soul? It turns out this is not an easy question.
Those where some good reads, thanks
 

ibyea

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,165
You only have to think of a transporter with a mechanism that clones a duplicate of you on the other side and then murder the original in some horrible fashion, like say drowning, after the transport happened, like the movie The Prestige, to at the very least acknowledge that the illusion of continuity is important, and it is not at all like the ship of theseus.
 

zswordsman

Member
Nov 5, 2017
1,773
I liked Space Dandy's take on Teleportation/Warping. It's pretty much taking your consciousness into a completely different universe.

Implanting your consciousness into an empty shell of yourself in a new universe at the location that you were trying to teleport to.

The cool thing too was that 3rd dimension beings couldn't tell the difference, they figured warping is warping but higher dimension beings could tell the difference between the originals and those that warped into that universe.

Even though that person looked the same, acted the same and had the same past, they were a completely different being because their consciousness came from a different universe, according to 4th D beings.

In a way it's pretty much like dying in your previous universe because you're shifted into a new one without you noticing it.
 

Skade

Member
Oct 28, 2017
8,976
I don't really see the issue with deconstruction though teleportation. After all, since our cells are dying and regenerating themselves continuously since the day we where born, one could say that our normal state of existence is made of a constant cycle of deconstruction and reconstruction. We have all shed the entirety of the cells we where initially made of when we came from our mothers wombs.

So assuming the teleportation technology is working as intended, you should still be yourself when you arrive on the other side. No harm done really.
 

Nooblet

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,792
I'm not sure why people are using the ship of theseus analogy. It doesn't really fit with what op is saying.

Instead of replacing parts of a ship like theseus or our body replacing cells, this would be like the creation of two different ships with the same blueprint and materials and then bombing one and then claiming they were always the same ship.
Ship of Theseus is not one rigid and inflexible experiment. There are variations of it that exist which have been added over time. If a transporter tech was invented tomorrow, someone will modify the Ship of Theseus though experiment to include that as well. The point of the experiment is about identity and self continuity.

Your analogy with bombing the ship is not fitting because bombing a ship leaves residue even if it's in total smokes, it's still converted to smoke and the new ship is built using new materials without preserving continuity. Whereas a transporter does not do that, it converts matter into energy and uses that energy to convert it back into matter.

A more accurate way to rephrase your analogy would be if a ship was bombed, and then the residue was used to rebuild the ship right down to the state of the individual atoms within seconds (thereby preserving continuity) without any sign of the bombardment (thereby preserving identity, since there is no other part of you that exists other than you), which will make it the Ship of Theseus. Moreover we don't know if there's a difference between an object in matter form and the same object in energy form because the technology does not exist so that means the scenario is ripe for thought experiments like this.
 
Last edited:

Hyun Sai

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,562
I don't really see the issue with deconstruction though teleportation. After all, since our cells are dying and regenerating themselves continuously since the day we where born, one could say that our normal state of existence is made of a constant cycle of deconstruction and reconstruction. We have all shed the entirety of the cells we where initially made of when we came from our mothers wombs.

So assuming the teleportation technology is working as intended, you should still be yourself when you arrive on the other side. No harm done really.
That theory fall apart when we know the brain cells last more than a lifetime. They don't get replaced. Same as Eye lens cells. Some last a short time, others 40 or 50 years. So there is no situation where all those cells get nuked and recreated in a very short lapse of time.

The Ship of Theseus theory can't apply to humans (or any living organism anyway), and never will.
 
Last edited:

NekoNeko

Coward
Oct 26, 2017
18,756
this always freaks me out. how would we ever know that there is just a new copy of someone and the original person is not in control anymore if everything is exactly the same?
 

MrKlaw

Member
Oct 25, 2017
33,538
So many issues with people not being able to safely transport back. If it can make a copy, why not just leave the original safely on board, let the clone do the legwork and then just transport back the memories so the local version is synced up.

I guess it has to destroy as it scans or something so there aren't normally two if you simultaneously- I think at some moment in time there are zero of you while you're in the pattern buffer?


what if it does scan you, but then liquidises the original and that's used on the food replicators
 

MrKlaw

Member
Oct 25, 2017
33,538
I don't really see the issue with deconstruction though teleportation. After all, since our cells are dying and regenerating themselves continuously since the day we where born, one could say that our normal state of existence is made of a constant cycle of deconstruction and reconstruction. We have all shed the entirety of the cells we where initially made of when we came from our mothers wombs.

So assuming the teleportation technology is working as intended, you should still be yourself when you arrive on the other side. No harm done really.

we are effectively walking ships of Theseus
 

THErest

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,195
Just read The Jaunt after reading this thread. I must say I am not all that impressed.

Yes, we got the horrific ending with the violent and disturbing imagery. It was obvious that something along these lines would happen, and only the fact that King cranked that shit to 11 (vs the mice and the convict) makes it work. Otherwise, I found the prose to be mediocre (for King), the story was kind of a slog to get through, (King can't be blamed for this because hindsight but) I was distracted at how wrong he was on so many points when establishing this world, and, even though it's just a scary story, I find it very hard to believe that a kid was able to fake being asleep, as if the technicians wouldn't have some way to check that everyone actually got knocked out, like come on.
 

Clefargle

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,156
Limburg
I don't really see the issue with deconstruction though teleportation. After all, since our cells are dying and regenerating themselves continuously since the day we where born, one could say that our normal state of existence is made of a constant cycle of deconstruction and reconstruction. We have all shed the entirety of the cells we where initially made of when we came from our mothers wombs.

So assuming the teleportation technology is working as intended, you should still be yourself when you arrive on the other side. No harm done really.
Because it is redundant an unnecessary. The paradox is that you can only teleport things to locations with the endpoint tech capable of reconstructing a human from molecules. If you already have that, then why destroy the original if it isn't necessary to reconstruct them on the other end? If we are already getting fuzzy with the idea of identity, then why care if there are multiples of the same person on both ends of the transporter? If you could reconstruct someone without killing the original, then why not just create a clone on one end of the teleportation? If you are actually transporting the physically same molecules that make up a person, you could say they are "preserved" on the other end and their "personhood" is intact, but then that brings other issues up about the continuation of consciousness on the other side.
 

Elandyll

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
8,898
OP if possible you should watch New Outer Limits S7e8 "Think like a Dinosaur".

Great riff on the Ship of Theseus principle applied to teleportation.
Real shame that series is not entirely available to watch.
 
Jun 16, 2018
246
A real Star Trek transporter would definitely be killing you but clearly the in show logic says it isn't just making a copy. If it were, they could just print infinite copies of any organic and somebody would've taken over the galaxy with a clone army.
 

west

Member
Oct 28, 2017
406
Because it is redundant an unnecessary. The paradox is that you can only teleport things to locations with the endpoint tech capable of reconstructing a human from molecules. If you already have that, then why destroy the original if it isn't necessary to reconstruct them on the other end? If we are already getting fuzzy with the idea of identity, then why care if there are multiples of the same person on both ends of the transporter? If you could reconstruct someone without killing the original, then why not just create a clone on one end of the teleportation? If you are actually transporting the physically same molecules that make up a person, you could say they are "preserved" on the other end and their "personhood" is intact, but then that brings other issues up about the continuation of consciousness on the other side.

I don't think there is a continuation issue at all. There is in fact no continuation anywhere. It's an illusion your consciousness creates from memories. The whole concept of ourselves the person is just something we construct . There is no difference when you wake in the morning if you are a perfect clone with your memories or not, the clone would still be you. You are not your atoms rather you a are a state of atoms. If you get split in the experiment, then both of you are you and both will have "continued consiousness", ofc they will go their separate paths from there. The whole idea that one is real and the other is a mere copy comes from our egos. The universe does not care where or when that state takes form. I you take it one step further and move the viewpoint from the person to physics, you might even consider that there is only one shared phenomena of consciousness while limited to small pools of local memories. You could maybe take that one step further and prove what happens after death, and also because "death" is not really an interesting configuration from the standpoint of the consciousness (simply lack there of) you might even argue death does not "exist" ;)
 

grand

Member
Oct 25, 2017
25,557
Good news Op. You don't have to worry about that as teleportation, in any form, is impossible lol
 

Viale

▲ Legend ▲
Member
Oct 25, 2017
11,650
Ship of Theseus is not one rigid and inflexible experiment. There are variations of it that exist which have been added over time. If a transporter tech was invented tomorrow, someone will modify the Ship of Theseus though experiment to include that as well. The point of the experiment is about identity and self continuity.

Your analogy with bombing the ship is not fitting because bombing a ship leaves residue even if it's in total smokes, it's still converted to smoke and the new ship is built using new materials without preserving continuity. Whereas a transporter does not do that, it converts matter into energy and uses that energy to convert it back into matter.

A more accurate way to rephrase your analogy would be if a ship was bombed, and then the residue was used to rebuild the ship right down to the state of the individual atoms within seconds (thereby preserving continuity) without any sign of the bombardment (thereby preserving identity, since there is no other part of you that exists other than you), which will make it the Ship of Theseus. Moreover we don't know if there's a difference between an object in matter form and the same object in energy form because the technology does not exist so that means the scenario is ripe for thought experiments like this.

Maybe we're thinking about transporter technology differently then. I don't think of it as converting you into energy and sending that as that makes less imtuitive sense to me than it scanning you as a sort of blueprint to then basically 3d printing you on the other side and getting rid of the original which sounds like a more realistic probability on how the tech would work than somehow converting you to a different energy, sending that and then converting you back.

Granted, this is all sci-fi tech, so it's difficult to say how it'd work at all in a real life scenario.
 

Clefargle

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,156
Limburg
I don't think there is a continuation issue at all. There is in fact no continuation anywhere. It's an illusion your consciousness creates from memories. The whole concept of ourselves the person is just something we construct . There is no difference when you wake in the morning if you are a perfect clone with your memories or not, the clone would still be you. You are not your atoms rather you a are a state of atoms. If you get split in the experiment, then both of you are you and both will have "continued consiousness", ofc they will go their separate paths from there. The whole idea that one is real and the other is a mere copy comes from our egos. The universe does not care where or when that state takes form. I you take it one step further and move the viewpoint from the person to physics, you might even consider that there is only one shared phenomena of consciousness while limited to small pools of local memories. You could maybe take that one step further and prove what happens after death, and also because "death" is not really an interesting configuration from the standpoint of the consciousness (simply lack there of) you might even argue death does not "exist" ;)
I know all of this and agree. The "paradox" in referencing is that neither method sidesteps this so why destroy the original if you are simply reconstructing it at the other end? Unless you have portals like OP described you would need to send an endpoint of the teleporter to the furthest reaches you intend to teleport to so it seems redundant to destroy the original person.
 

Hyun Sai

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,562
I know all of this and agree. The "paradox" in referencing is that neither method sidesteps this so why destroy the original if you are simply reconstructing it at the other end? Unless you have portals like OP described you would need to send an endpoint of the teleporter to the furthest reaches you intend to teleport to so it seems redundant to destroy the original person.
But isn't the point of teleportation that you, yourself, travels elsewhere ? If I'm just being told that "success ! A clone of yourself is on Mars !", I'll ask for a refund lol.
 

Clefargle

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,156
Limburg
But isn't the point of teleportation that you, yourself, travels elsewhere ? If I'm just being told that "success ! A clone of yourself is on Mars !", I'll ask for a refund lol.
Yeah which is why the only way that seems to be possible is with idealized portals or "gateways" that break physics as we know them or would destroy humans passing through them anyway. The only way I see possible is making a wormhole out of exotic matter and two enormous supermassive non-rotating black holes. But even then, it is likely that a human wouldn't survive the trip and would arrive as a puff of photons or something best case scenario.
 

west

Member
Oct 28, 2017
406
But isn't the point of teleportation that you, yourself, travels elsewhere ? If I'm just being told that "success ! A clone of yourself is on Mars !", I'll ask for a refund lol.

Yeah, but as I formulated, you yourself go to Mars in this scenario as well. But I understand why in the interest in maintaining business, the "you" stuck on earth is better destroyed than kept there complaining -> thus the current form of teleportation is the only remaining in most scifi timelines. ;)
 

Hyun Sai

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,562
Yeah, but as I formulated, you yourself go to Mars in this scenario as well. But I understand why in the interest in maintaining business, the "you" stuck on earth is better destroyed than kept there complaining -> thus the current form of teleportation is the only remaining in most scifi timelines. ;)
People getting destroyed so that another them is getting elsewhere will also never work from a business standpoint. That's why most scifi timelines assume that your consciousness also makes the trip, magically.
 

PeskyToaster

Member
Oct 27, 2017
15,328
The portals in Hyperion were pretty cool, called farcasters. On the surface, they seem like dimensional rifts, bending space-time for travel between two points. They even use them for a interplanetary river that flows through multiple farcasters on different planets or different parts of your house (if you're rich) might be on different planets connected by these portals. Don't want to spoil too much in case people want to read it though.
 

Parch

Member
Nov 6, 2017
7,980
Einstein's general theory of relativity suggest that wormholes could exist, so I'm going to go with that as most probable. Figure out a way to create and control a wormhole, like in the movie Contact, and you can send a person or pod long distances. I find that much more logical than disassembling a person.
 

Clefargle

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,156
Limburg
Einstein's general theory of relativity suggest that wormholes could exist, so I'm going to go with that as most probable. Figure out a way to create and control a wormhole, like in the movie Contact, and you can send a person or pod long distances. I find that much more logical than disassembling a person.
Yup and they're the best candidate for Time Machines as well, but within certain limitations.

A recent MIT paper summarizing

In addition to facilitating effectively faster than light travel, wormholes could potentially be used as time machines, in the following sense first developed by Caltech theoretical physicist Kip Thorne. Imagine an advanced technology capable of creating, manipulating, and containing both ends of a stable, traversible, wormhole. Place one end in a laboratory on Earth and the other on a spacecraft capable of traveling through space at some reasonable fraction of the speed of light. Imagine the wormhole connecting the lab and spaceship is created in some future year, say 2500. Now keep one end on Earth and send the spaceship off in any direction at some appreciable fraction of the speed of light for a finite duration after which it will decelerate, turn around, come back to Earth, and stop, so the wormholes ends are brought back together.
Relativity tells us that the clocks of observers left on Earth and those in a relativistically moving spacecraft will begin to differ by an amount that depends on the speed of the craft. Since moving clocks run slow in relativity, a spaceship observer might experience a short subjective duration of say, a few weeks, but thousands or millions of years could pass in the external universe depending on how fast they were traveling. In this sense, time travel to the future is easy, and does not require wormholes, just a ship capable of moving at relativistic speeds. A spaceship executing the above maneuver might find itself thousands or millions of years in the future after stopping. Yet an observer at the wormhole mouth in the laboratory on Earth would still have its clock synchronized with the shipboard wormhole. If the ship finds itself, say in year 3500, after returning to Earth, any observers on the ship could return to the year 2500, traveling 1000 years into the past, simply by stepping through their shipboard wormhole back into the laboratory on Earth.
In this way, wormholes could theoretically be used to travel into the past. However, in this case, the shipboard time travelers could never travel to before the year 2500. This poses a striking answer to the question, ``If time travel to the past is possible, how come we aren't being constantly visited by time travelers from the future?" For these types of wormhole time machines, the answer is simply, because they haven't been invented yet! Time travel of this sort can never take an observer back to before the original date when the wormhole connection was set up. This is a particularly clever resolution to an interesting time travel paradox.
 

Amnesty

Member
Nov 7, 2017
2,704
Sure.

Every hour you travel from point A to point B where those points are hundreds of millions of miles apart. You don't really sweat that or even notice it, so teleporting across the globe is child's play.
Yes, but I'm not being vaporized when moving about.

I don't think there is a continuation issue at all. There is in fact no continuation anywhere. It's an illusion your consciousness creates from memories. The whole concept of ourselves the person is just something we construct . There is no difference when you wake in the morning if you are a perfect clone with your memories or not, the clone would still be you. You are not your atoms rather you a are a state of atoms. If you get split in the experiment, then both of you are you and both will have "continued consiousness", ofc they will go their separate paths from there. The whole idea that one is real and the other is a mere copy comes from our egos. The universe does not care where or when that state takes form. I you take it one step further and move the viewpoint from the person to physics, you might even consider that there is only one shared phenomena of consciousness while limited to small pools of local memories. You could maybe take that one step further and prove what happens after death, and also because "death" is not really an interesting configuration from the standpoint of the consciousness (simply lack there of) you might even argue death does not "exist" ;)
No, the copy would be another different instantiation of you at which point it becomes its own entity. You're mysticizing things here. Yes, our view of our 'selves' is a formal mental construct, but the physical reality of our bodies is not some vague wishy washy mystical realm or something.


There are contradictory arguments in this thread -

We have 'there is no real continuity because your 'vague material form' is constantly shuffled about, but then we also have 'so following that, you would retain continuity when being transported.
 
Last edited:

Nooblet

Member
Oct 25, 2017
13,792
Maybe we're thinking about transporter technology differently then. I don't think of it as converting you into energy and sending that as that makes less imtuitive sense to me than it scanning you as a sort of blueprint to then basically 3d printing you on the other side and getting rid of the original which sounds like a more realistic probability on how the tech would work than somehow converting you to a different energy, sending that and then converting you back.

Granted, this is all sci-fi tech, so it's difficult to say how it'd work at all in a real life scenario.
They do convert matter into energy and send that energy to the destination via subspace.
They actually literally call Transporters matter-energy converters in Trek.

Hence the naming being Transporters and not Teleporters, since it's physically transporting the person, just in the form of an energy.
 
Last edited:

west

Member
Oct 28, 2017
406
No, the copy would be another different instantiation of you at which point it becomes its own entity.

I just said the same thing in the text you quoted. Both persons are equally real at the point of copy and both see themselves as continuations of the one. I never alluded to any mystical link.

Edit: To clarify, my point was that there is specifically zero links required. If the same structure as you came into existence randomly in some strange nebula, albeit impossibly improbable; It would still be you. Now if the the copy was identical to the quantum spin level it could cause some spooky effects however.
 
Last edited:

Clefargle

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
14,156
Limburg
I just said the same thing in the text you quoted. Both persons are equally real at the point of copy and both see themselves as continuations of the one. I never alluded to any mystical link.

Edit: To clarify, my point was that there is specifically zero links required. If the same structure as you came into existence randomly in some strange nebula, albeit impossibly improbable; It would still be you. Now if the the copy was identical to the quantum spin level it could cause some spooky effects however.
A "perfect clone" would start to change the moment after stepping off the teleporter and no longer be what we consider "YOU" in the same way the original would be. And the point is that natural change/decay of the body over time isn't the same process as deconstructing/reconstructing someone with a teleporter. Of course there is no hard YOU between one minute and the next. But that's not how the word is used by humans. If I am fine one minute and then get injured the the next, millions of cells have changed and countless molecules rearranged, but we would still refer to me as "ME". So the point is that language is insufficient to describe the subatomic changes we humans experience every day but it would suffice to describe vaporization of an entire human and reconstruction a galaxy away. These aren't really equivalent.