Originally Posted by AngeloG.
But...if you accurately create a simulation of something that is alive, what would be the difference? I feel like it would meet the definition of "alive".
Just to be random and off topic I guess if your idea of 'alive' meets the criteria of an AI program AI programs are alive and so is this:p My personal opinion is that alive means before death, so it's a biological thing, maybe a robot can be alive too... it's still subject to the laws of entropy and decay so it must die too, in that sense. Very loaded:p
Anyway. Here I have an analogy! You can take a dead person's brain and stimulate it with electrical currents and you can do the same to most areas of the body to stimulate the nerves (technically part of the brain). If you controlled all of the variables and had enough energy left in the cells you could have a working human being. If you mapped the entire
brain on a computer and 'booted it up' started throwing inputs at it it would be as alive as if you had the biological version in the lab and controlled all the variables. They would in theory
both be behaving as alive as the brains in you and I.
Maybe that is alive.
However this particular brain-map is only going to include very very very basic functions, it would be more akin to making legs move by triggering certain pathways or understanding how audio is so perfectly recorded. Very specific and dis-attached functions because there simply won't be enough brain for more.