Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Technology and Science News › [Yahoo] Scientists make teleportation breakthrough
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Yahoo] Scientists make teleportation breakthrough - Page 12

post #111 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dmoney View Post
They've activated a resonance cascade! Gordan get out of there!
Dear god.. head crabs..
Core
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 D0 @ 4.0Ghz Asus P6X58D-E Diamond XOC 4870/512 @ 800//4400 Corsair 3x4gb DDR1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
2x500GB WD RE2 Raid0 Asus Combo, Asus Combo Corsair H80 Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
HP 2408h Wide Saitek Eclipse II Corsair HX850W Antec 900 Two 
MouseMouse Pad
Logitech Mediaplay Cordless Black as in Dark abyss 
  hide details  
Reply
Core
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 D0 @ 4.0Ghz Asus P6X58D-E Diamond XOC 4870/512 @ 800//4400 Corsair 3x4gb DDR1600 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
2x500GB WD RE2 Raid0 Asus Combo, Asus Combo Corsair H80 Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
HP 2408h Wide Saitek Eclipse II Corsair HX850W Antec 900 Two 
MouseMouse Pad
Logitech Mediaplay Cordless Black as in Dark abyss 
  hide details  
Reply
post #112 of 155
Quote:
destroying them in one place and re-creating them in another.
^^

Meaning if it were ever possible to be conducted on animals / Humans.
The person that's being teleported will be you, but the one being recreated on the other end will not be you, It will be a clone, A carbon copy of yourself/conscious..

The real you gets destroyed in who knows how and what kind of pain.

Quote:
Originally Posted by M3thodAngel View Post
Yay no more iran or iraq! USA
Fixed, Yes sir e bob. Now Thats more like it.
Edited by TheBirdman74 - 4/18/11 at 4:27am
post #113 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Murlocke View Post
No matter how hard they try, living things can never be teleported and survive. It will be a copy of you, with your exact thoughts and looks. To everyone else it will seem the teleportation was successful, but YOU died. Your copy, will act like you until he teleports again or dies himself but you wouldn't be controlling him - he would be himself.

In short, teleportation could lower the human life to almost nothing, people will be teleporting constantly and dying in the process, but there will be no way to know because it will appear "successful" to everyone else.

If you make a copy of a file on your computer, it's the same file but it's not the SAME file.

Scary thought, I would never teleport. I'd teleport items though.
This is the truth.... now if we could 'bridge' the gap between two places we can start talking
post #114 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rian View Post
That is more or less how teleportaion would work.
No.

I don't know what teleportation is considered to be now a days, but back when Sci-Fi movies were the closest thing to teleportation, it was NOT about destroying the original and then creating a replica elsewhere. If that were the case, then Cpt. Kirk would have been killed (and recreated) every time he was beamed aboard the Enterprise, which is not what viewers were supposed to take away from the experience.

Teleportation was originally conceived as some way to transport an object through space by moving SPACE, instead of by moving the object--or something along those lines.



"Hey, look at me, I'm going to destroy my car in Pittsburgh, and then re-create it in Alabama and call it teleporation! Did I forget to mention that it's going to take me about a 1 year to complete the project? Well... it's still teleportation though!"
Metal Case
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 920 ASUS GeForce GTX285 1GB 6GB Corsair 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
500GB Vista Ultimate 64-bit Asus 24" 850W 
  hide details  
Reply
Metal Case
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 920 ASUS GeForce GTX285 1GB 6GB Corsair 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
500GB Vista Ultimate 64-bit Asus 24" 850W 
  hide details  
Reply
post #115 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by hak8or View Post
I have always wondered about teleportation and the energy required to do it.

Lets say you want to teleport a hot dog from your house in the UK, to another house in China. First, you destroy the original, since the basic laws of physics state energy/matter cannot be created nor destroyed, where would the energy go from destroying the original? By destroying, I am under the assumption that the original would be physically destroyed. Then you have the information "teleported" to the house in China. If I understand correctly, that information would need no energy to travel, as it is just teleporting. But, how do you re create the object in the house in China?

You have to create the mass in some form or another, so I presume that the object will be generated from energy, and the magically teleported information about the object. To create any object you would need a massive amount of energy, absolutely mind boggling amount of energy, and I am guessing the energy would come from the destroyed original. How does the energy get transfered, if not, then where will the energy come from to make the new object, and where did the original energy go that came from the destroying of the original object?

I am sure that if we would be able to teleport objects, by destroying the original, and making a new object somewhere else, we would be able to have the ability to just destroy matter and turn it into pure energy, which would be a massive jump forwards for mankinds search for energy. We could go to mars on a space ship that gets its energy from a bag of potatoes!!

Eh, just thought out loud because it is morning here and I do not have much else to do
We'll be FAR past Mars by the time we master what you're talking about.
Metal Case
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 920 ASUS GeForce GTX285 1GB 6GB Corsair 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
500GB Vista Ultimate 64-bit Asus 24" 850W 
  hide details  
Reply
Metal Case
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 920 ASUS GeForce GTX285 1GB 6GB Corsair 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
500GB Vista Ultimate 64-bit Asus 24" 850W 
  hide details  
Reply
post #116 of 155
C'mon folks, it's not really that difficult to imagine the 'dead original/living copy' concept.

However, for all we know, we could be constantly dying now. A fresh conscience taking over our bodies every moment. That said, I will not be teleporting.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Xeon E5645 Asus Rampage II Gene eVGA GTX460 SSC 3x4GB Corsair Dominator PC3-12800 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOS
Crucial C300 64GB Seagate Momentus XT 750 Western Digital GP 2TB EARS Windows 7 Premium 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Asus VE278Q DSI SMK-88 Seasonic X-660 Lian Li U6B 2011 SE 
MouseMouse Pad
Logitech G500 KAI.g3 HIEN - HARD 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Xeon E5645 Asus Rampage II Gene eVGA GTX460 SSC 3x4GB Corsair Dominator PC3-12800 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveOS
Crucial C300 64GB Seagate Momentus XT 750 Western Digital GP 2TB EARS Windows 7 Premium 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Asus VE278Q DSI SMK-88 Seasonic X-660 Lian Li U6B 2011 SE 
MouseMouse Pad
Logitech G500 KAI.g3 HIEN - HARD 
  hide details  
Reply
post #117 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by kaxel View Post
You are making the fallacy. If one is "the clone" and one is "the original" then they are not the same. It doesn't matter if you can tell or not. The fact is they are different. They are two distinct beings. Your metaphysics don't make any sense at all to me. They aren't indistinguishable in the sense that you can only perceive one, they are indistinguishable in that you can't tell which is the original. I don't see how it makes sense to describe an event where one object is an original and one object is a copy of the original and to say that they are the same object. You are making the fallacy. You are saying "Copy = Original & Copy ~= Original". I am simply saying "Copy ~= Original".
You are argue philosophy and my response to that is simply "Proof it".

If you cannot prove the difference between A and B, are they not the same? Which is the copy? If every sub-atomic atom is the same, every energy is the same, and every quanta is the same.... what is the difference? The physical location?

This has been debated before by scientists and there is no "correct" answer. Just Google it..... it comes down to "Do you believe in a soul?"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Porthios View Post
No.

I don't know what teleportation is considered to be now a days, but back when Sci-Fi movies were the closest thing to teleportation, it was NOT about destroying the original and then creating a replica elsewhere. If that were the case, then Cpt. Kirk would have been killed (and recreated) every time he was beamed aboard the Enterprise, which is not what viewers were supposed to take away from the experience.

Teleportation was originally conceived as some way to transport an object through space by moving SPACE, instead of by moving the object--or something along those lines.



"Hey, look at me, I'm going to destroy my car in Pittsburgh, and then re-create it in Alabama and call it teleporation! Did I forget to mention that it's going to take me about a 1 year to complete the project? Well... it's still teleportation though!"
You need to watch more science shows where scientist actually talk about these things.


In Star Trek, people are deconstructed (compensating for the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle). Then they are reconstructed at the target. During the teleportation itself, they are not conscience.

The arguement can be made the person is being killed (your atoms ripped apart is not conducive to living) and a "copy" of them is what actually is created. That "copy" is for all intent and purpose the same.

I believe in one episode in Star Trek, they use transporters to cure someone of a disease. The person coming out is definitely not the same going in.

Quote:
Originally Posted by RonindeBeatrice View Post
C'mon folks, it's not really that difficult to imagine the 'dead original/living copy' concept.
In scientific terms, what is a copy if two are identical in every way?

Thought problem:
If a person walks into a machine and is deconstructed.... and two people walk out.... which is the original? Does the original even exist still?
Edited by DuckieHo - 4/18/11 at 6:38am
Once again...
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 [4.28GHz, HT] Asus P6T + Broadcom NetXtreme II VisionTek HD5850 [900/1200] + Galaxy GT240 2x4GB G.Skill Ripjaw X [1632 MHz] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Intel X25-M 160GB + 3xRAID0 500GB 7200.12 Window 7 Pro 64 Acer H243H + Samsung 226BW XARMOR-U9BL  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Antec Truepower New 750W Li Lian PC-V2100 [10x120mm fans] Logitech G9 X-Trac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
Once again...
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 [4.28GHz, HT] Asus P6T + Broadcom NetXtreme II VisionTek HD5850 [900/1200] + Galaxy GT240 2x4GB G.Skill Ripjaw X [1632 MHz] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Intel X25-M 160GB + 3xRAID0 500GB 7200.12 Window 7 Pro 64 Acer H243H + Samsung 226BW XARMOR-U9BL  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Antec Truepower New 750W Li Lian PC-V2100 [10x120mm fans] Logitech G9 X-Trac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #118 of 155
Quantum mechanics make my head hurt.

Schrodinger's cat is just an example of statisticians being asshats. Proving you can use stats to render anything true, including a simultaneously alive and dead cat.

Anyway, "destroying" and "re-creating" light isn't something I thought physically possible. It's the first law of thermodynamics (thank you wiki!)
Little Beast
(12 items)
 
Black 'n' blue II
(15 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i7-4710MQ Nvidia Geforce GTX860M 2GB 16GB Kingston DDR3 1600MHz 240Gb Silicon Power S55/S60 SSD 
Hard DriveOSOSMonitor
1Tb Toshiba HDD 5400rpm Windows 8.1 Linux Mint 18 17.3" LED 1920x1080 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
PCSpecialist Optimus V ST17-860 Logitech MX518 Steelseries QcK Creative HS800 Fatal1ty 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 860 @ 1.25V MSI P55-GD65 Xpertvision Radeon HD4850 4GB G.Skill Ripjaw 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
150Gb Velociraptor & 1Tb WD Caviar Black Opticon Lightscribe DVD-RW DL Noctua NH-U12P SE2 Vista Home Premium x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Hyundai BlueH H224W 22" LCD Saitek Eclipse II Thermaltake Purepower RX 550 Galaxy III 
Mouse
Patuoxun optical gaming mouse 3200dpi 
  hide details  
Reply
Little Beast
(12 items)
 
Black 'n' blue II
(15 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i7-4710MQ Nvidia Geforce GTX860M 2GB 16GB Kingston DDR3 1600MHz 240Gb Silicon Power S55/S60 SSD 
Hard DriveOSOSMonitor
1Tb Toshiba HDD 5400rpm Windows 8.1 Linux Mint 18 17.3" LED 1920x1080 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
PCSpecialist Optimus V ST17-860 Logitech MX518 Steelseries QcK Creative HS800 Fatal1ty 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 860 @ 1.25V MSI P55-GD65 Xpertvision Radeon HD4850 4GB G.Skill Ripjaw 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
150Gb Velociraptor & 1Tb WD Caviar Black Opticon Lightscribe DVD-RW DL Noctua NH-U12P SE2 Vista Home Premium x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Hyundai BlueH H224W 22" LCD Saitek Eclipse II Thermaltake Purepower RX 550 Galaxy III 
Mouse
Patuoxun optical gaming mouse 3200dpi 
  hide details  
Reply
post #119 of 155
Quote:
Originally Posted by chemicalfan View Post
Quantum mechanics make my head hurt.

Schrodinger's cat is just an example of statisticians being asshats. Proving you can use stats to render anything true, including a simultaneously alive and dead cat.

Anyway, "destroying" and "re-creating" light isn't something I thought physically possible. It's the first law of thermodynamics (thank you wiki!)
First law of thermodynamics applies to a closed system.

Even if this was a closed system, creating something will simutaneously destroying something would following the law.

However, that is not the point of this experient. The point is the information being communicated.
Once again...
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 [4.28GHz, HT] Asus P6T + Broadcom NetXtreme II VisionTek HD5850 [900/1200] + Galaxy GT240 2x4GB G.Skill Ripjaw X [1632 MHz] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Intel X25-M 160GB + 3xRAID0 500GB 7200.12 Window 7 Pro 64 Acer H243H + Samsung 226BW XARMOR-U9BL  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Antec Truepower New 750W Li Lian PC-V2100 [10x120mm fans] Logitech G9 X-Trac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
Once again...
(13 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 [4.28GHz, HT] Asus P6T + Broadcom NetXtreme II VisionTek HD5850 [900/1200] + Galaxy GT240 2x4GB G.Skill Ripjaw X [1632 MHz] 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
Intel X25-M 160GB + 3xRAID0 500GB 7200.12 Window 7 Pro 64 Acer H243H + Samsung 226BW XARMOR-U9BL  
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Antec Truepower New 750W Li Lian PC-V2100 [10x120mm fans] Logitech G9 X-Trac Pro 
  hide details  
Reply
post #120 of 155
As it is a bit of a pet peeve for me when news agencies fail at science, I thought I may as well point out that, in reality, a Schrodinger's cat would not be in a superposition, as it is a large enough object to cause the particle's wavefunction to collapse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DuckieHo View Post
You are argue philosophy and my response to that is simply "Proof it".

If you cannot prove the difference between A and B, are they not the same? Which is the copy? If every sub-atomic atom is the same, every energy is the same, and every quanta is the same.... what is the difference? The physical location?

This has been debated before by scientists and there is no "correct" answer. Just Google it..... it comes down to "Do you believe in a soul?"

...

In scientific terms, what is a copy if two are identical in every way?

Thought problem:
If a person walks into a machine and is deconstructed.... and two people walk out.... which is the original? Does the original even exist still?
It's a fallacy to assert that this debate boils down to the existence of a soul (I realise that, for many, it does), especially since such a concept would have no place in a rational discussion.

The far more interesting question here is that of consciousness. Yes, a perfect copy is indistinguishable to any outside observer. However, I am conscious and the copy is conscious. Both will have effectively the same thought processes, yet be separate and, therefore different entities.

To illustrate what I mean, I'd like to go back to your thought problem. If we had 2 exactly identical people, they'd have 2 independently conscious minds and killing one would necessarily kill that entity, even if the 2 are indistinguishable. In short, this teleportation would end a user's consciousness and start a new identical one, which, from the original user's point of view, is death. To disagree on this conclusion would essentially require the premise that 2 identical conscious entities alive at the same time would have to share one consciousness.

Sorry if this is a bit unclear, but it's tricky to convey exactly what I mean.
Green Machine
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 2600K ASUS P8Z68-V EVGA GTX 570 Corsair Vengeance 16GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
OCZ Agility 3 Seagate Barracuda Corsair H100 Windows 7/Ubuntu dual (64 bit) 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dual (23" and 19") Trust eLight TP3 650 CM 690II nVidia edition 
MouseMouse Pad
Logitech G5 Steelpad 5L 
  hide details  
Reply
Green Machine
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i7 2600K ASUS P8Z68-V EVGA GTX 570 Corsair Vengeance 16GB 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
OCZ Agility 3 Seagate Barracuda Corsair H100 Windows 7/Ubuntu dual (64 bit) 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Dual (23" and 19") Trust eLight TP3 650 CM 690II nVidia edition 
MouseMouse Pad
Logitech G5 Steelpad 5L 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Technology and Science News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Technology and Science News › [Yahoo] Scientists make teleportation breakthrough