If you're teleported are you the same person at both ends?

[chris_uk_83]

Further to mine and Ummon's discussion in the "Science quiz" thread I thought I should continue it somewhere more appropriate.

The idea is this: You're teleported by turning you into photons (using Darth Wong's teleportation equipment) and sent somewhere else, where you're reassembled.

Ummon says that you're a perfect copy of your original self but the being that was you at the beginning ceases to exist, while I beg to differ.

Ignore the workings of Darth Wong's equipment for now, that's not the point of the thread.

[Ummon]

First of all, for you to be an indistinguishable copy, we already have to face serious technical difficulties.

As you know, upon measurement, quantum waveforms collapse, thus making either the vectorial speed or position of particles undetectable. The precision of any reconstruction process would be herratic to say the least.

Now let's avoid discussing waveform collapse according to the most modern theories, which indeed make it unnecessary (preserving the randomness and indetermination of the process). Let's keep the thing to an exemplary model.

[chris_uk_83]

Just a quickie to recap the discussion so far:

As an additional sidenote: Ummon is by all means dead, the one which emerges is a perfect copy.

And besides, relativistic time distortion here doesn't interfere with the process, it's more like Ummon was disassembled at time t0, and reassembled a time t1, exactly as he was at time t0, thus for him no time has subjectively passed.

That's an interesting philosophical debate isn't it? Kind of assumes the existence of a soul. Maybe this is worth making a thread for in EM&M.

Not necessarily: the interruption of the continuity of consciousness implies that the person is dead, the one reformed is a copy who has been created anew. No need to postulate souls.

So if you go unconscious, thus interrupting the continuity of consciousness, then when you come round you're a different person, albeit an exact copy of the one that got knocked out?

Indeed, that's also discussed thoroughly in cognitive-science-related articles of speculative nature, by Douglas Hofstadter for example.

Your brain is effectively disintegrated (converted to energy). The process is surely destructive...

[chris_uk_83]

So are we saying that this all comes down to how you define the person? If you interrupt the stream of consciousness you eliminate the person? If consciousness then resumes it's a different person who wakes up? I've got to say I'm not convinced.

[Ummon]

Well, as I was saying above, before coming to that, we must assume that we can replicate the person effectively, which is very dubious.

But absolutely: there is no identity between the two persons, as you traumatically interrupt all continuity by introducing an irreversible transformation, which infact alters the information previously present as well (as annihilation produces two divergent photons, whose quantum properties are linked - therefore if you deflect one you deflect the other as well). By moving the system so far away from the previous equilibrium, you ensure that whatever result you manage to reconstruct at the other end, by spending further energy, will not be the same as the previous person.

[chris_uk_83]

Well, as I was saying above, before coming to that, we must assume that we can replicate the person effectively, which is very dubious.

Agreed. But if you're using a quantum mechanical argument to say that you wouldn't be able to get the same consciousness back then surely you must apply the quantum mechanical argument to the impossibility of reconstruction in the first place (Star Trek incidentally has a Heisenberg Compensator to overcome this difficulty!). Therefore we're debating the impossible and any conclusion we come to is actually meaningless

Can I just check that you're not saying that if I get punched and knocked out then I'll never wake up, I'm dead, but a copy of myself does wake up and carries on where I left off?

[Ummon]

Actually, there's one subtlety: current analysis suggests that quantum phenomena might not be time-indifferent (as classical quantum theory suggested), thus also making the death of the first person unavoidable, even if we imagine perfect reconstruction. That's what I was implying by irreversible transformation.

[chris_uk_83]

So this goes back to determinism does it? Where everything ever is predetermined based on initial conditions? I'm not familiar with the time independence of quantum phenomena though.

[Ummon]

Determinism actually, is completely surpassed. We merely exit Hilbert space representation.

[chris_uk_83]

So, in other words "it gets complicated"?

[ajm317]

Much of what's being said here assumes that the human body (or at least the human brain) is a quantum object to begin with. I find this assumption at least a little dubious without some support.

Sure, if you measure a system you change it's wavefunction, but in the case of the brain, do we CARE? If I measure a baseball, it will always be a baseball, it exists in the classical limit. Does the brain exist in the classical limit? Or is it in the quantum limit? Does the act of measuring the brain leave it unchanged, to within acceptable deviations? Or does it change it drastically?

I believe that the majority opinion in science is that quantum effects are unimportant to the brain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_mind

[Ummon]

Human body is a composed of quantum objects, and has a quantum waveform. It's merely almost coincident with its perceived volume.

And here we were discussing matter, not mind. Infact if we put mind into the quantum issue, it would be possible that the first person surives teleportation.

[ajm317]

Human body is a composed of quantum objects, and has a quantum waveform. It's merely almost coincident with its perceived volume.

Of course it does. That's not the point. The point is that it exists in the classical limit, which means that you can understand the body without worrying about quantum mechanics. Quantum effects are there, but they're insignificant.

It's like a baseball. If I throw a baseball at a concrete wall, there is a chance that it will quantum mechanically tunnel through the wall! This never happens of course. The odds of it are something like 1 in 10^400. The baseball is in the classical limit, we need not concern ourselves with quantum mechanics.

[Ummon]

I must dissent: if you turn me into photons, you need quantum mechanics to reassemble me...

[ajm317]

True enough, however this need not introduce further problems.

Consider, we analyze Ummon, and determine his components "well enough." In other words, fundamentally macroscopically. One could then beam the information somewhere, with a great degree of accuracy, and then reconstruct him, again "well enough."

Provided quantum mechanics need not concern us when measuring Ummon, then the new Ummon will be, as near as anyone can tell, the old Ummon.

[Ummon]

As I said, since you mist pick speed or position, that well enough is a challenge.

I personally advise opening wormhole, it keeps me alive. That is, if the gravitational forces do not rip me to shreds.

[ajm317]

As I said, since you mist pick speed or position, that well enough is a challenge.

Where exactly does this come into play? When measuring you and when reconstructing you we don't care about uncertainty, because they are too small an effect to matter on a macroscopic scale.

Perhaps you mean when interpreting the information? Here it is also not a problem. You could for example encode the information in spin states of the photons or something like that.

[Ummon]

Where exactly does this come into play? When measuring you and when reconstructing you we don't care about uncertainty, because they are too small an effect to matter on a macroscopic scale.

Summed up, these random effects can cause severe discrepancies.

Perhaps you mean when interpreting the information? Here it is also not a problem. You could for example encode the information in spin states of the photons or something like that.

To encode the information in the spin you need a separate photon ray. All the rays pass through a medium (space) which isn't exactly void. Interference by particles, will cause cumulative mistakes, which cannot be avoided for example sending the information in packets, as the distance in light years forbids 2 way communication so that packet reception is confirmed. Finally, redundance in this case cannot remedy the problem, as infact the message is too long to ensure no critical mistake occurs.

[ajm317]

Summed up, these random effects can cause severe discrepancies.

Now you're just trying to sound cool.

Summed up these random effects can be predicted. It happens all the time in physics, it's what statistical mechanics is based on.

Again Ummon, do you really think I can't teleport a baseball? That can be done right now. I send someone in Moscow the exact specifications of a baseball and they make one. That's all we're doing here. If it's true that quantum effects like superposition are unimportant on the scale of your brain, body, whatever, then there's no problem. It might be HARD, but it is certainly POSSIBLE.

To encode the information in the spin you need a separate photon ray. All the rays pass through a medium (space) which isn't exactly void. Interference by particles, will cause cumulative mistakes, which cannot be avoided for example sending the information in packets, as the distance in light years forbids 2 way communication so that packet reception is confirmed. Finally, redundance in this case cannot remedy the problem, as infact the message is too long to ensure no critical mistake occurs.

1. I don't believe this argument requires us to be beaming someone to Alpha Centauri. I could be sending you over a fiber optics cable to Zurich.
2. I'm quite confident that there are ways of sending the information. Sure it's a lot of information, but if you're arguing that this number of bits is too many, and the most bits we can send practically is this, now you've lost sight of the original argument.

[Ummon]

Now you're just trying to sound cool.

No.

Summed up these random effects can be predicted. It happens all the time in physics, it's what statistical mechanics is based on.

Again Ummon, do you really think I can't teleport a baseball? That can be done right now. I send someone in Moscow the exact specifications of a baseball and they make one. That's all we're doing here. If it's true that quantum effects like superposition are unimportant on the scale of your brain, body, whatever, then there's no problem. It might be HARD, but it is certainly POSSIBLE.

I do not put your claims into question. Actually, they sound a bit (lot) excessive, yet I have heard there is research on teleportation going on, and maybe they just sound so: I am not a physicist, and I am aware of the apparently miraculous nature of future technology. I would though try to explain to you, that such small details as protein folding for example, are essential for the survival of a living organism. Infact, I am sure that you may some day (or now, who knows) teleport inanimate objects. On the other hand, if you tell me that you are going to teleport living organisms, I confirm that:

1) you kill them.
2) you will get potentially damaging mistakes.

That the whole amount of singular events is statistically predictable is certain: on the other hand you see, again we get back to a statistically viable prediction, which doesn't take into account the rarest combinations which may arise: correct me if I am mistaken of course.

Additionally, I reiterate, molecules do have a quantum waveform and mistakes there are dangerous, to the point of being capable to cause deadly diseases.

1. I don't believe this argument requires us to be beaming someone to Alpha Centauri. I could be sending you over a fiber optics cable to Zurich.
2. I'm quite confident that there are ways of sending the information. Sure it's a lot of information, but if you're arguing that this number of bits is too many, and the most bits we can send practically is this, now you've lost sight of the original argument.

Actually, the original argument was about Alpha Centauri... In any case, in a cable, that surely is possible. But where's the gain in getting disntegrated just to end in Zurich with 4 or 5 less hours travel?...

Surely, the information is computable, yet you see again we need to take unavoidable transmission mistakes into account. That requires redundancy. The information becomes greater. More mistakes.

That can be faced as well, for sure.

I personally would not use such a device even with a 100 billion dollar prize to entice me.