On 2/17/2012 1:53 AM, meekerdb wrote:
On 2/16/2012 8:20 PM, Stephen P. King wrote:
On 2/16/2012 8:58 PM, meekerdb wrote:
So Kraus' argument does itself show at least one aspect of how
classical teleportation is problematic. I rest my case.
But his teleportation, which is based on transmitting the position
of every atom in a human body is far more than required for Bruno's
argument which only requires transporting the brain's functional
structure. The position of atoms in your body change continuously
with no influence on your consciousness.
And where is the reference to an article discussing the
experiment that shows that this claim is true? Have you considered
that our "conscious" experience might be a tiny sliver of what is
going on in our heads, which includes all those atoms changing their
positions (with how much momentum? we can determine that using
thermodynamics and temperature arguments for a statistical average,
OK)? So all we need is semi-exact position data and a statistical
upper and lower bound of their momenta and we can reproduce a brain?
Go ahead, give it a whirl. ;-)
Additionally, in consideration of the "mapping the neural
network" idea, how exactly are you going to overcome the fact that
the more precisely you measure the positions of every atom in a
brain the less information you can gather of their momenta?
Irrelevant. Computation takes place at the classical level, so you
only need classical level information.
Umm,OK. What if the "classical" is only the Boolean representable
part of the Universe? I am taking this line of reasoning in a
different direction not to obfuscate your point but to try to get you
to better understand what I am trying to explain. My conjecture is
that what we call conscious experience is restricted to being Boolean
representable and it is this restriction that is the source of the
appearance that our world is classical.
I don't know what "Boolean representable" means. True/false?
Representable by a list of True or False questions.
We just happen to be somewhat justified in our belief that "all that
exists are Integers" because we cannot observe the true nature of
reality - which is a constant and total state of superposition.
Sounds like you're taking a theory (QM) to be *the true story of
reality* -- something you cautioned against.
I think that there is enough experimental evidence that QM is about
as close as we can get to "true story" while still remaining fallible.
;-) So we are quibbling about the classical limit?
Additionally there are some interesting and obsure reasons that come
from linear algebras that disallow for certain operations to occur if
the vector spaces of linear algebras is allowed to be of infinite
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1zzRX9bnGs&feature=share for more
if we are going to implement a simulation of a brain that allows
for continuation then we had better be able to map both the
position and the momentum data down to the substitution level. The
problem is that the substitution level is molecular in scale, we
know this because chemical neutransmiters play a vital role in
That doesn't follow. The neurotransmitters are released in
quantities such that their diffusion is well modeled classically.
In any case their function is to excite the synapse, which could be
done electrically by an artificial neuron. There is nothing to
indicate that the substitution level must be at the molecule level,
much less at the quantum state of molecules. You are no doubt right
that any mapping/reproduction would introduce a discontinuity in the
stream of consciousness; but this isn't an important objection since
a hard blow to the head or some anesthetic does the same thing.
I am only considerign situations where reasonable quantities of
"missing time" and other disorientation are allowable in the
continuations. I have no unreasonable expectations here, I hope. It
is just that we have only started to understand how our 3.5 lb of
"grey matter" generates our illusion of consciousness so I don't
think that reckless speculations are advisable. Maybe I am being too
timid, that quite possible....
The fact that a tiny amount of LSD will totally change your "state
of mind" is sufficient proof of this.
The amount isn't that 'tiny' in terms of the number of molecules.
My point is that the level of substitution has to be at the
But it doesn't. Ordinary metabolism changes the molecules over a
period of days; so it must be the structure, which is consistent, not
the molecules which change.
So how does this matter, the stability of at the molecular level is
in the order of days and neuron firing rates are very small fractions of
that... Of course it is the relative invariance of structure...
Does QM stuff not matter at that level?
Awesome! I am ready to learn. ;-) I am a student after all, just
a bit of a smart ass, but that is just defensive coloring.
You see this is the kind of problems that get completely
glossed over in UDA. Many of you balk that I am making a big deal
about physics, but without physics we would simply not be here to
have this conversation.
As a physicist I'm happy to discuss the physics.
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at