If Star-Trek style transporters existed, would you use them?

[TXlib]

Let's assume that the risk of failure was less than from flying (and the risk from flying is much less than the risk from driving)?

One fundamental problem I'd have with such a device is that you are torn apart at point A and reassembled at point B. Who is to say that what is reassembled at point B is not actually you, but looks, acts, thinks, and remembers exactly as you did, and thinks it IS you. The entity that was you, however, winks out of existence when you at point A are disassembled; your consciousness is extinguished, never to reappear.

[GOPisEvil]

1. Bones McCoy might agree with you.

Would I be the first to use one? Nope. But if others used them with no problems, I'd probably give 'em a whirl.

[TXlib]

8. But would you be convinced that what came out the other side

maintained the original consciousness of the individual?

[GOPisEvil]

11. I'd have to examine what evidence there was.

But it is a concern, to say the least.

[TXlib]

21. Assume there is, and can be, no _evidence_.

Just a philosophical dilemma.

If you are inclined to theistic feelings, you might be more likely to assume the copy is imbued with your soul, and therefore, is you.

[Az]

22. Then where is

the soul when there is a glitch resulting in a copy? Its about the continuity.

[Duckiesplaything]

24. If there is a copy

Then you get one good copy and one evil copy.....Don't you watch star trek???.......LOL

[elfwitch]

2. Hell yes!

I hate the actual traveling part of travel. I'd like to just walk in a closet and walk out wherever it is I'd like to be.

[commander bunnypants]

3. ok Mr. Barclay

there has not been a case of transporter psychosis in over 150 years.

Yea I would use it


DDQM

[felonious thunk]

4. I have a philosophical problem with it

Ok, even if that doesn't happen, during transport, what state are you in? Are you dead? You do not exist at that point. Your matter, or some kind of genetic code for "rebuilding" you was in transport, but you'd be non-existent. And even if it's a successful transport, are you still you? You are now an entirely new entity that is completely the same as the previous incarnation, but you're still not that old one. So have you died?

[TXlib]

10. That's exactly my problem.

Are you replaced by an exact copy of you who THINKS it's you, but you are actually extinguished.

[felonious thunk]

14. You would have to be

As soon as you step into the transporter, and you are broken down, you no long exist. You would now just be particles of light sent from one computer to another, and under any definition of death I can imagine, your body would either cease to be, or lose it's functionality. So your body would cease to be, so you'd be dead.

Or would it not be death? Would you become the particles of light? We are of course made of particles and if those particles were just in a different state, but still contain all the pertinent information, is it death?

[Duckiesplaything]

20. Energy cannot be destroyed.

Only changed, so you wouldn't cease to exist your form would simply change from matter to energy, the universal constant still exists.
Kinda sounds like your talking more about a kind of religious thing than an actual physical reality. (even though it's not real).
But then I'm just a closet physicist so don't mind me.

[BigMcLargehuge]

15. you should read "Think like a Dinosaur"

by James Patrick Kelly, it's a short story that deals with this EXACT problem :)

[TXlib]

19. Here is an online version

http://www.scifi.com/set/playhouse/dinosaur/

[BigMcLargehuge]

23. TXLib you are my hero!

great find!!!

[TXlib]

29. I couldn't get it to download, but check this:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=949629&mesg_id=953387

[Az]

18. Absolutely

It is easily demonstrated by not dismantling the person at the transmission side. If you create a copy of the person where does their continuity of existance percieve itself. Break the process, break their life.

[CO Liberal]

5. Very Funny, Scotty - Now, Beam Down My Clothes!!!

:-)

[Rabrrrrrr]

6. YES!! And I pray that we get them invented soon

Imagine the reduction in fossil fuel usage it would mean, and the ability to travel somewhere lickety split would be awesome.

[Parrcrow]

9. it would be great, especially

if we get to say lickety split alot

[terrya]

7. "The Fly" comes to mind. No thanks. :-)

Terry

[jpgray]

12. I wish more people walked, frankly (nt)

[Az]

13. No

Its principle is that it destroys a you in one location and rebuilds you in another. Your perception of existance is tied to the contnuity of the process that is your life. Break it and you are effectively dead. Rebuild it elsewhere and you have merely made a person that thinks they are you. Your perception of reality will have ceased.

Imagine if instead of disintegrating the original it merely copied you elsewhere. Where would you be? Your perception, your continuity would be tied to the original.

[TXlib]

25. I suspect this is where theists and atheists might differ.

My hypothesis is that if the original is disassembled and the copy assembled immediately, theists would perhaps assume the soul would transfer as well, so that the copy IS you.

Atheists, with no belief in a soul, would have nothing to base their trust in such a device.

If you copied yourself without destroying the original, the theist would perhaps assume that a new soul was created for the copy.

[BigMcLargehuge]

16. I would, but I'd get caught

walking around in Best Buy with my GPS device the day before their big screen TVs started to disappear.

[Duckiesplaything]

17. Wouldn't this

Go back to that old philosophical statement; "I think therefore I am."? Since the reassembled you thinks just like you, wouldn't it become you just in a new spot?...A rebirth of sorts?

[DS1]

26. I still building my people friendly trebuchet

[C_eh_N_eh_D_eh]

27. I teleported home one night

with Ron and Sid and Meg.
Ron stole Meagan's heart away,
and I got Sidney's leg.

So long and thanks for all the laughs, Doug.

[ProfessorGAC]

28. Based Upon Your Assumptions, Yes

However, the convenient Heisenberg Compensator still troubles me.
The Professor