Steven B. Harris sbharris at
Mon May 24 18:26:39 EST 1999

In <7ibev6$sbk$1 at> "Danny Boy"
<danny_._boy at> writes: 
>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>Content-Type: text/plain;
>	charset="iso-8859-1"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>>>... Either that, or a copy of a dead you. ;-)
>>   Well, how is a copy of a live you going to differ from a copy of a
>>dead you?
>Well, that's the question, isn't it?  I was paying attention all
right, =
>I'm just not convinced is all.  I totally agree with what you're
saying =
>about gross arrangement.  However, (and please forgive my siting =
>examples from Star Trek, I do realize it's not-for-real, but they make
>some valid points, I think), in the Star Trek universe, inanimate =
>objects are transported (and replicated) using molecular resolution =
>(presumably throwing caution with respect to h/2pi to the wind, which
I =
>agree would be fine), and people are transported using quantum =
>resolution.  There's so much we don't know about what makes us alive. 
I =
>would be worried about not getting the spin of my quirks right
(probably =
>too much worrying, though), let alone having my subatomic particles
vary =
>in position by h/2pi (which for all we know could make a world of =
>difference when it comes to being alive).  You ask how a copy of a
live =
>you is going to differ from a copy of a dead you. . .I'm just not =
>convinced that h/2pi is as small as we think it is when it comes to =
>transporting live beings.  Maybe I'd just be like Dr. McCoy:  afraid
to =
>step foot into the transporter and get my molecules scrambled. . .

   But you get your molecules scrambled all the time!  Thermal motion
knocks them around and back and forth.  Molecules get broken down and
replaced, so that after a decade a lot (probably most) of your atoms
are not even the same, but have been replaced by different (though
identical) atoms from your diet.  Does that make you not you?  

More information about the Plant-ed mailing list