Consciousness and Teleportation

clearz · 18-10-2010 8:13pm #1

Something I've always wondered is what happens to someones consciousness if they where teleported.
Take the first scenario. If I where teleported but the original copy of me was not destroyed in the process. I sit in a machine, somebody presses a button and out pops an identical quantum copy of me in the adjacent machine. I step out and look at this copy in amazement and he looks back in amazement because his tought processes are the exact same. To him he is the real me and to me I'm the real me.
Now let's repeat the experiment except this time the original copy of me is destroyed in the teleportion process. What happens to my original consciousness? Do I cease to exist even though my copies mind is essentially my own? The first scenario would suggest that the teleported copy is not me and I have indeed ceased to exist.

Gary L · 18-10-2010 9:38pm

Working on the premise that consciousness is entirely routed in the physical body, You would exist in exactly the same form after the transport. I'm not sure I understand the more abstract idea of a seperate soul but I guess in that context you would cease to exist.

Sardonicat · 07-11-2010 9:37pm

If his thought processes are exactly the same his consciousness is not seperate to yours, that is, there is no you/he dichotomy.

Dades · 10-11-2010 12:53pm

Again, working on the basis that our consciousness is entirely hardwired, I can't help but think that you, as an individual, is dead.

The newly constructed "you" is basically a newly created 'person' who has your memories/characteristics installed. Basically this new person continues on in your place, believing they are the old you, when in fact they are a doppelgänger taking the place of your dead self.

It's a really interesting dilemma.

Morbert · 13-11-2010 4:33pm

The newly constructed "you" is basically a newly created 'person' who has your memories/characteristics installed. Basically this new person continues on in your place, believing they are the old you, when in fact they are a doppelgänger taking the place of your dead self.

I think this is they key. What is even stranger is , since our cells are constantly renewing themselves, we are effectively doppelgängers taking the place of our dead selves without even realising it anyway.

clearz · 14-11-2010 3:38am

Yes Dades. That's the impression I get also. To your friends and family all is fine as this imposter (it's hard to even call him an imposter since he totaly believes he is you) but for all intents and purporses the real you is no more.

Morbert that is an intersting point also I think it is something like every seven years your body has completely replaced every cell. The only thing with this is the process is gradual.

Josh_Calvert · 06-01-2011 4:55am

just to say that impulses in an organism as complex as the brain couldn't be mapped by a teleportation device anyway presuming we're using light waves in some way.Have I just missed the point of a thought experiment?

clearz · 06-01-2011 5:09am

Josh_Calvert wrote: »

just to say that impulses in an organism as complex as the brain couldn't be mapped by a teleportation device anyway presuming we're using light waves in some way.Have I just missed the point of a thought experiment?

Yes I think you missed the point considering the state of the art in teleportation technology is teleporting a single photon a few kilometers.

18AD · 06-01-2011 4:17pm

The problem is more accutely presented if we consider that the person who is teleported is copied.

As the thought experiment goes, you have an atomic modelling device somewhere else. When you step into one end, your entire structure is computed and then this information is sent to the other machine and "you" are recreated. The original you is destroyed, but the remodelled you is now the only you.

If you imagine that the original is not destroyed then you end up with two identical versions of you. So which one is the real you?

Josh_Calvert · 06-01-2011 6:02pm

but that happens constantly, this atom transportation device would only being doing quickly what entropy does slowly...our cells replace themselves...the universe expands and decays and grows colder (as far as I can see) things proceed apace along the 'timeline'...the you you are now is billions of quantum states not the you you were 20 minutes ago...we're all not completely ourselves all the time anyway.

seamus · 06-01-2011 6:15pm

It's an interesting philosophical one.

For all intents and purposes you could consider that there's an instant of unconciousness from stepping into the device and appearing on the other side.

You could develop this somewhat and suggest that the same thing occurs when you go to sleep. Since the sense of "self" exists in the consciousness (we're not aware of ourselves when we're sleeping and we have many dreamless nights), it's fair to suggest the possibility that one person goes to sleep at night, and another entirely identical, but separate person wakes up in the morning.

That is, I might only have started existing this morning at 6am, and I might cease to exist tonight at 12am, but I will never know. From my point of view, I am and always have been me, but then I would say that because I have the continual memories of the thousands of seamuses who have gone before me.

From the point of view of the guy who steps out of the teleporter, he'll think, "Phew, dunno what I was worried about, I'm still here". But the guy who stepped into the teleporter is probably vapourised and gone.

It's a noodle scratcher alright and the reason I'd never use a teleporter, if they're ever invented in my lifetime (unlikely tbh).

I do think though that the invention of such a thing - or even a means of transferring "consciousness" to an artifically-created medium - would put a lot of religious & philosophical questions to rest, as well as raising a few millions more.

Josh_Calvert · 06-01-2011 6:29pm

just to point out above: pretty sure a persons 'consciousness' can't be transferred to an inanimate device...even if at it's simplest consciousness is a function of complexity and emergence I'm still pretty sure we don't have computers set up to function like this.For example, the brain has more discrete elements than can possibly be mapped without heading into quantum computing territory.

seamus · 06-01-2011 6:32pm

At present, of course not.

But it's not beyond the realms of possibility that a suitable surrogate could be developed - even if it's a grown organic brain in a vat.

Josh_Calvert · 06-01-2011 6:59pm

I have severe doubts it'll ever happen.Even if it just requires more time, well society will be long gone before the stage where sufficient technology will exist for this stuff to happen.

Rabble Rabble · 06-01-2011 7:03pm

Dades is right. In Star Trek they take the information and transmit it. There is some indication that they send the atoms as well, but that is of no interest. Any atoms can be used ( assuming they can make anything from anything , which is what the replicator can do*). So send the information.

So what happens is

1) Get in teleporation device.
2) Get fried. Die.
3) Copy is created thinking he is you. He stays alive until he is beamed up. The new copy remembers everything but is a third copy.

ST admits this when it stores people in buffers, and replicates two people ( as in an episode with Riker).

I wouldnt get into one. I think I would cease to exist.

* except Dilithium crystals.

Rabble Rabble · 06-01-2011 7:03pm

Josh_Calvert wrote: »

I have severe doubts it'll ever happen.Even if it just requires more time, well society will be long gone before the stage where sufficient technology will exist for this stuff to happen.

This thread is, however, a thought experiment.

Josh_Calvert · 06-01-2011 10:39pm

thats a fair point actually. My own view is that existence flickers and vibrates and we're not the same from one moment to the next...I see no lossy issue with teleportation...

Rabble Rabble · 07-01-2011 11:25am

Josh_Calvert wrote: »

thats a fair point actually. My own view is that existence flickers and vibrates and we're not the same from one moment to the next...I see no lossy issue with teleportation...

There is very little empirical evidence that existence flickers. My brain thinks not.

The transporter issue is a kill and a copy ( and a transportation). It all happens instantly but is no different from sending the copy to the planet and then killing the guy in the teleporation device a minute later. Both cant share the same consciousness.

Josh_Calvert · 08-01-2011 4:45am

'tis vibrational no? Hence 'flicker' when consciousness or conscious agents are added into the mix.

anyway it's essentially an email question...or a file attachment issue

It's the same consciousness if a is terminated after a* has been re-integrated...since there's no quantum paradox...the teleportation is just an event is a linear event sequence.If a and a* both continue then it's two 'yous', 'mes' or 'selves' and simple systems theory dictates pretty rapid divergence...though it seems like we could look at identical twins separated at birth as a useful addition to the thought experiment...

I suppose I'm conjoining 'self' with consciousness here...with animals or humans with a brain issue that hinders a sense of self teleportation is their lives moment to moment.

But then I left uni a while ago and am increasingly worried at my own thickness, so point out where I'm wrong with these musings

18AD · 08-01-2011 7:42pm

Josh_Calvert wrote: »

It's the same consciousness if a is terminated after a* has been re-integrated...since there's no quantum paradox...the teleportation is just an event is a linear event sequence.

I don't see how the consciousness being the same relies on whether the original person has been destroyed or not. That's like saying that you're you because there're no other you's.

That's why I think it's trickier when you introduce the two subjects.

If a and a* both continue then it's two 'yous', 'mes' or 'selves'

The problem here is that the two people are not the same person. As in, they have different points of view. Their consciousness' are seperate. It is not as if one mind has control over two bodies.

There is definately going to be a continued sense of self for each person and I think that they are both correct to assume so. You are always an "I" or self or whatever you want to call it. The mistake is in trying to identify what kind of self you are. Like with a name or some other label. A self is only a self, regardless of what it's other attributes are. I guess it depends on you what you take to be the "same" aspects in the two people. Names and memories are the same, but is that what makes up you? If there even is a self.

It reminds me of two drops of water form the same pond. You take them out and they're seperate; you put them back and they are one again.

clearz · 14-01-2011 1:39pm

I guess the problem comes down to whether you are a dualist, which I am not. I would say that the teleported brain/mind is seperate from the original, which has been destroyed along with the original person.

18AD · 14-01-2011 4:03pm

clearz wrote: »

I guess the problem comes down to whether you are a dualist, which I am not. I would say that the teleported brain/mind is seperate from the original, which has been destroyed along with the original person.

I think if you take this line you have to agree that all of things that make you who you are, eg. memories, appearance, character, style etc... are not what one would call a self. Since if these things were what you called a self then the teleported person would still be you.

Encoder1970 · 14-01-2011 9:12pm

In my opinion, only if you moved the actual pieces of yourself would it be teleportation. Otherwise it's simply copying a person which creates a copy with a separate conciousness.

18AD · 15-01-2011 7:57am

Encoder1970 wrote: »

In my opinion, only if you moved the actual pieces of yourself would it be teleportation. Otherwise it's simply copying a person which creates a copy with a separate conciousness.

What are the "actual pieces of you"? Considering your every molecular part is replaced every few years, what exaclty is "yours"?
If you accept that only the parts that are exaclty yours are just transported, what does that say about the other parts? How about the other bits that change? Are they not you? Where is the transition point?

clearz · 15-01-2011 5:31pm

18AD wrote: »

I think if you take this line you have to agree that all of things that make you who you are, eg. memories, appearance, character, style etc... are not what one would call a self. Since if these things were what you called a self then the teleported person would still be you.

Yes you are right, and I think this is probably where my uneasyness about the concept of teleportation stems from. If the original copy did not need to be destroyed in the process of teleportation then which copy is me? Are they both equally me?

Joe1919 · 15-01-2011 6:27pm

The one who speaks is 'me'.

One possible way out of this dilemma is to see the self and consciousness as a process or stream that is continuously changing and not fixed. In this way, you are not the same person that you were yesterday.

In the case of a copy, immediately after teleporting, there would exist two identical 'selves' or brains in the same conscious states.
However, although both would have similar dispositions and memories (like twins who are reared together), a divergence would start to occour as both would split away from each other and begin living separate lives and be subject to different conditions and hence would form different identities.

PS. There is a quote below about 'the case of the owner of George Washington's axe which has three times had its handle replaced and twice had its head replaced!'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus

Encoder1970 · 19-01-2011 7:47pm

18AD wrote: »

What are the "actual pieces of you"? Considering your every molecular part is replaced every few years, what exaclty is "yours"?

Good question, however not everything is replaced. Certain cells are not replace every X years, for instance brain cells and egg cells as far as I know.
This seems to be under debate. Why does tattoos not vanish after X amount of years and similar questions.

We can teleport things today, in the sense that we can copy a CD and transport the content to another location and burn a copy.
Is that the same CD? No, it's a copy.
For it to be the same CD you'd have to find a way to transport the actual atoms in that CD over a distance.
In my opinion.

Also to teleport a human you can't just make cells out of thin air in the receiving end, you must transport the actual pieces.

himnextdoor · 20-01-2011 5:56am

I think that there is another problem that any teleporter would have to address. The processes from which mind and consciousness derive are dynamic and interactive; unless the data representing the subject were collected instantaneously, the teleported, or rebuilt, cells would all have changed their age with respect to each other. The first cell scanned will have aged less than the last cell scanned and therefore the result of the teleportation could not be an identical copy of the original.

clearz · 20-01-2011 10:56am

Encoder1970 wrote: »

Good question, however not everything is replaced. Certain cells are not replace every X years, for instance brain cells and egg cells as far as I know.

I think you are wrong. Every cell is replaced and your body is completely changed every seven years.

Encoder1970 wrote: »

This seems to be under debate. Why does tattoos not vanish after X amount of years and similar questions.

Tattoos do not vanish because the ink is injected into a stable layer of the skin. The cells arround it still get replaced. The tattoo will get a bit blured over time because of this but the ink remains.

Encoder1970 wrote: »

We can teleport things today, in the sense that we can copy a CD and transport the content to another location and burn a copy.
Is that the same CD? No, it's a copy.
For it to be the same CD you'd have to find a way to transport the actual atoms in that CD over a distance.
In my opinion.

Although the data pits in a CD are very small they still operate in the macro physical world. When you download a cd from the internet and burn it is has essentially been classically teleported. This is contrasted to quantum teleportation which works on the principal that the universe is fundamentally made of information. The universe is essentially a giant quantum computer that is computing itself

Encoder1970 wrote: »

Also to teleport a human you can't just make cells out of thin air in the receiving end, you must transport the actual pieces.

As has been said before this is a thought experiment about what it means for the mind to be teleported. Talking about how it would function is pointless but it certainly wouldn't work by sending the actual matter contained in the object. All the same it would be likely that teleporting to any arbitrary position would be impossible, like in star trek. More likely it would be from one transporter machine to another. The entire wavefunction of the object being sent would be read destroying the original in the process. This information would then need to be entangled with a carrier stream and somehow sent to the target machine somehow avoiding decoherance allong the way. The target machine would then put the object back together using a tank of hydrogen or some other element. Dosen't matter what kind because you will be building every atom in the object particle by particle. Basically ridiculously advanced technology would be needed

sbsquarepants · 20-01-2011 11:12am

Dades wrote: »

It's a really interesting dilemma.

It's also an episode of star trek, the next generation! Teleporter accident left 2 Rykers, they basically became seperate people from that point on due to different circumstances.
That's what i believe would happen should this ever actually occur, our conciousness is not fixed it evolves and adapts in relation to our experiences. The 2 people would only be the "same" for a split second, they'd probably be very similar from then on, but not exactly so. As to who is "real" and who isn't, well both are quite obviously real.....but who owns the stuff, gets the girl and so on?
Also, assuming there is no teleporter accident and everything works perfectly, in between being disassembled in machine a, and reassembled in machine b, do you exist at all?

Josh_Calvert · 22-01-2011 10:58pm

Tom Riker ftw.

Consciousness and Teleportation

Comments