DUDE TELEPORTING / CLONING KILLS YOUR CONSCIOUSNESS AND REPLACES IT WITH SOMEBODY ELSE LMAO

well considering when i go to sleep i don't die i'd say that i do

look i'm not going to sit here on Veeky Forums trying to explain this again

either understand or don't it's not my problem

Teleporting DOES kill you though

So... you conciousness continues to exist when you're unconscious?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ship_of_Theseus

Since our cells renew constantly, apparently the exact copy thing doesnt matter. Frankly at quantum level particles are identical anyway, there is no way to prove that you are made of new atoms when the machine reconstructs you. If the deconstruction and reconstruction are done in the right timing, why not

Being less conscious != being unconscious
See : dreaming

What about people who don't dream?

>Since our cells renew constantly
Nope, not all.
Digestive tract cells renew a lot, and all epithelia in general.
But neurons never renew (bare some very specific regions), and unless you imply consciouness stems from the whole body, this argument isn't sound.

That's why there are no hypothetical mechanics of cloning. See quantum teleportation for something more relevant. But OP's greentext is still roughly accurate.

no argument is sound because we haven't defined consciousness

How can there exist two separate conscious entities that are both completely 1:1 identical?

It's like saying that apple 'B' will be a different colour to apple 'A' after it exits the cloning machine even though both apples are exactly identical to one another.

I have read that neurons renew as well unlike the popular belief

obviously, philosophers are smarter than scientists and you should believe what they say.

>>DUDE TELEPORTING / CLONING KILLS YOUR CONSCIOUSNESS AND REPLACES IT WITH SOMEBODY ELSE LMAO
Well sort of, but for all intents and purposes, from the perspective of the new person and everyone observing, the new thing is as you as the pre-teleported you was. It's also worth noting that as long as the failure rate was minimal evolution would probably select for humans which didn't mind deadly teleportation processes eventually. From your genes' point of view it makes no difference if 'you'/your consciousness dies as long as they still exist and something is piloting the body they reside in effectively.

There is no problem of consciousness. Teleporting ends one copy of you and creates another copy of you. It doesn't make sense to force some kind of experience on top of this.

>Hurr durr I copy my hard drive to another computer and then smash the original, what did my computer FEEL man???

Quiet zombie. Humans are talking.

I just don't see a problem. I think if you made sufficiently complex information processors they would naturally pose these questions about identity and thought. It doesn't mean there's something special going on. If anything, my view is optimistic. If there's something really special about consciousness that ends at death, for me at least that's much more depressing.

Not him but humans are just biological autonomous robots. A completely accurate physical copy in a new location is identical to the original, destroyed version.

>consciousness is special because it ''''''''''feels''''''''' special
>am i being scientific yet?

how is it supposed to feel? If you made a computer that could gather information about the world and form abstract questions, wouldn't it inevitably pose questions about the nature of thought?

>Is this true?

It's true for sleeping and blinking and not blinking too. You pass from a previous state that are no longer you and you have no control over. The persistency is just an illusion, I can load a game of CIV 5 on my laptop that I previously played on my desktop. It's the same game despite the hardware being changed.

>en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No-cloning_theorem
This has no practical signficance for "cloning" or "teleportation" of reliably-behaving macroscopic systems, like a living being or non-quantum computer, which operate in such a way that they produce consistent behavior irrespective of quantum randomness.

The only thing it requires the loss of in a copied object is short-lived quantum states. For instance, you can't perfectly clone a photon to test its polarization on multiple axes and break quantum encryption (however, imperfect cloning is allowed, and must be accounted for in designing quantum encryption protocols).

Please stop pretending that quantum jargon means what it sounds like to a layman.

>Not him but humans are just biological autonomous robots. A completely accurate physical copy in a new location is identical to the original, destroyed version.
That doesn't negate consciousness and his pretending it doesn't exist is silly as you can measure it's relationship with individual neurons.

>That doesn't negate consciousness and his pretending it doesn't exist is silly as you can measure it's relationship with individual neurons.
If consciousness correlates 1:1 with neurons then teleportation should preserve it.

So you're saying there's only one dollar bill in circulation?

An hero.

Is your consciousness that existed 2 seconds ago dead?

Wouldnt teleportation stop all electrical activity in the body?

If you are cloned sleeping, from which body will you experience reality when both of you wake up at the same moment? Assume that both original and clone have the same brain states when waking up.

it's funny how parts of Veeky Forums can't grasp this concept

and you're implying that you can? guess what - you can't.

The original. Unless your brain is directly connected to the clones and the brains function in tandem you are still separate people. You might have the same personality, even the same memories, but the second a stream of consciousness between two brains is severed they begin to diverge immediately. Your conscious mind isn't some mystical metaphysical cloud that's just stapled to your body, it is a result of the functions of your brain and is most highly expressed when your brain is in high gear while you're awake. Unless the clone bodies are being remote controlled by a single brain, they are different individuals.

Dollar bills aren't 1:1 identical retard

defragmenting X organism gradually and then converting/fusing its particles into data compactible with the medium of teletransportion and then sending them to destination. Once there the data is converted back to its original form. No death or anything involved.

your brain is still actively streaming information

Right, conscious experience comes from brain states. What I need to know is what causes the original to wake up perceiving the world from the same body as before sleep. If what causes consciouness are the brain states alone, then why am I feeling the same body when waking up, if my clone is waking up at the same moment with the same brain states?
I am not defending dualism here, just want to know how to solve this by means of matter.

God here, it's true. Souls cannot be copied or teleported except by me.

yeah I'm not teleporting until teleportation supports some sort of reality warp

This

No, you're wrong. God is real, and souls exist.

of course its true. if you destroy someone and make a copy of them some where else what the fuck do you think is gonna happen?

holy shit you're retarded

this is on the same level as that movie where Arnold Schwarzenegger gets cloned.

>hurrdurrr if i make a copy of myself im immortal some how durrrr

>nearly every post ITT

This.
Only space-time bending for me, if not available i'll take the long road thank you very much suicidal fellows.

One thing puzzle me though, there's no way the destruction process is really needed, isn't it ?
Why not just construct a clone on the other planet ( using teleportation for intraplanetary travel is beyond retarded ) ?
Why not just send the data about you without desintegrating yourself ?

top fucking lel at that pic

tards ITT BTFO

What if you wanna come back?

because nothing destroyed your consciousness

sleep is just your brain doing different things and where you aren't using your senses

>YOU'RE WRONG AND I'M RIGHT BUT DON'T ASK FOR AN ARGUMENT BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE ONE

Yes. Think about it, if a perfect clone is created, do you magically see through its eyes? No. So if the original dies, only the clone gets to continue experiencing external stimuli (being conscious).

People who say the copy will be someone else fail to understand that this happens all the time to us anyways.

The human body replaces 98% of its atoms within a single year with new ones. Your consciousness most likely undergoes the same process, replacing a part here and there with a copy. The "you" of a year ago is gone. "You" died a dozen times over already.

It is in my best interest to preserve my consciousness as long as I can. Even if it ceases to exist when I sleep, I'll try my damnedest to not kill it by teleportation early.

What if you get teleported while you sleep?

Then the Jews have won

Teleportation doesn't copy you, nor does it destroy you. You are converted into waves of energy which are then converted back to matter. This is star trek nonsense of course, but you never at any point cease to exist, you merely change states.

Consciousness doesn't come in distinct units. It's a phenomenon of brain activity, it's not one thing a person has.

So >KILLS YOUR CONSCIOUSNESS AND REPLACES IT WITH SOMEBODY ELSE
is undefined.

Conscioussness is more aking to something your specific brain configuration generates. So if you teleport someone by deconstructing them, converting them into energy and reconstructing them at the target, the new body would generate a new consciousness.

Well, not if it reproduces the same configuration, which is the whole point.

Well but that's not you anymore. In the same sense a computer program doesn't write to the same memory address anymore when you restart it, your consciousness would be identical to the old one, except it's not "you" behind the wheel anymore.

>Teleporting will kill you but build a perfect clone of your current self at the destination
Would you do it, Veeky Forums? It has all the advantages of suicide, with none of the negatives. "You" are still there, the others can't tell a difference. But you get to be dead.
Free of all bullshit. Without any worries as it's no longer up to you to do anything. And yet "you" might still do great things.

Swamp man theory look it up dingus

>Well but that's not you anymore.
That's a meaningless statement. It depends on how "you" is defined, you're just punting the question into that definition.

To quote
>Conscioussness is more aking to something your specific brain configuration generates.

The point of the teleportation experiment is that the configuration is reproduced, otherwise you'll have a different object.

During normal biological existence, the configuration changes all the time in small ways, so transmission changes within those ranges are no more relevant than they are in ordinary survival without teleportation.

>The point of the teleportation experiment is that the configuration is reproduced, otherwise you'll have a different object.
But I can very quickly prove that whole idea wrong. Suppose you do the entire experiment, but you skip deconstruction part.

Now there's two of you, which one are you in control of, which one is "you"?

It depends on how you define "you". According to your configuration definition, both are "you".

Obviously, their configurations diverge once they make different perceptions and interactions with their environment.

What I mean is who's behind the steering wheel, who is looking through your eyes.

I don't know what that means. I think you have a fundamentally flawed understanding of what consciousness is.

Consciousness is not a personal soul that is tied to your identity, it is just a phenomenon of local brain activity.

your question doesn't make any sense. both are you. both look through their own eyes

You're intentionally being stupid right now, you know exactly what I mean. There can't be two you's, there is you and a copy. That's the entire conundrum.

I think you're the one with the flawed understanding. I'm not talking about them not having a conscisciousness, I'm talking about the inability for you to posess two bodies.

>you know exactly what I mean
I know you're confused as fuck

1) There's a single organism with a single brain
2) Organism gets cloned
3) There are two organisms, each with their own brain. Both have (for a very short time) the exact same configuration as the first one, then a very similar one.

Which part don't you understand? What the fuck is "you" and what the fuck do you mean by "the inability for you to posess two bodies"?

>I'm talking about the inability for you to posess two bodies.
Consider two "you"s, monday you and tuesday you.

Monday you exists next monday and tuesday you exists next tuesday.

They are very similar, but one exists on monday and the other on tuesday, that is, they exist in different locations in spacetime.

One of them is a little hotter because the air is hotter and the other is a little fatter because he ate more. One has a bad mood while the other has a little better mood. One sees mostly red colors, the other sees mostly black and white movies.

Two "yous" in different locations, with two similar but slightly different bodies. Two distinct conscious perspectives.

This happens ALL THE TIME during normal survival.

This is literally my post here: I think you're entirely unfamiliar with the concept that we're talking about here. I suggest you read about it a little and then come back.

Explain then if you're so smart, you pedantic piece of shit. 100% sure it's just you're too retarded to get it.

Your ego is part of your consciousness. If you teleport, a new body is created at the location, which generates a new consciousness, but it cannot generate your ego, instead it creates a new ego.

This can be anecdotally proven by turning off the deconstructor of the teleporter, resulting in you and a copy of you. Both are you down to the last atom, but only one of them has your ego.

Right now your ego is what allows you to move your muscles to type words into your computer. If you clone yourself with a teleporter, you will not be in control of the other body, some other ego will be.

I can not put this into simpler words, if you don't get it now, then I give up on you.

That thing you call an "ego" (not the usual use of the term btw) is a superfluous entity that we can Occham's Razor away.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swampman

It depends on whether consciousness is a direct result of physical interactions of matter.

If so, then technically yes, but no. If you clone your exact physical state at a particular moment in time and materialize it, it is a successful clone, but it would be imperfect due to the interactions that happen within the time frame of the clone's materialization and the copying of your matter. If it is possible to complete rematerialize a representation of someone's physical state at some time, then human identity goes out the window. Assuming your clone is somehow copied and materialized perfectly instantaneously, the only thing separating you from your clone is minor differences in phenomena that will grow over time. While it would be far more similar to you than anything else on the planet, it is impossible for it to remain exactly identical to you unless it received the exact same phenomena and physical interactions. Human identity would be pushed from simple resemblance and behavior to quantum structure and interactions.

If consciousness and matter are two separate entities, then definitely not, assuming your mind reclaims your teleported body without a hitch. However, based on the ridiculous amount of evidence thus far suggesting that anything we observe (including ourselves) is the direct result of some physical interaction, this would be a monumental discovery outside of teleportation. Teleportation would be a small drop in the bucket of implications that dualism's validity would produce. Further experiments would shift dramatically towards accessing this realm of mental matter.

To conclude with a simple answer to your question: Nobody knows for sure yet.

>Right now your ego is what allows you to move your muscles to type words into your computer.
No, that is done by my motor cortex in collaboration with my Broca's area.

okay, I understand what's going on. you're talking about a specific outdated, useless interpretation by hundreds of years old continental philosophy
fuck off, this is a science board

You can occham's razor your existence away? I'd like to see that.

You might also call it sensory processing algorith for all I care. There must necessarily a part of you that cannot be copied, even if you make a atom for atom copy with a machine of yourself.

This ethereal something, however you may call it, is fundamentally responsible for your actions right now.

Consider this abstraction: Your body is a remote controlled machine, the something that is controlling the remote is what I'm talking about. You may copy the machine, but now there's someone else controlling it.

No? I'm talking about the physical inevitability that your consciousness isn't something that can be cloned without changing something about it.

If you make 4 copies of yourself, you don't suddenly turn into a hyper efficient collective that share their thoughts and emotions.

At the point of cloning, you stop being one entity and become two. You diverge from that point, conscioussness included.

Fucking retards ITT I swear.

Jesus this is a load of nonsense.
1) Define consciousness and ego
2) Prove ego and consciousness exist
3) Prove that teleporting generates a new consciousness but not a new ego
4) Prove that teleporting generates a new ego
5) Define having an ego
6) Prove that in the cloning case the first person has the ego but the second one can't
7) Prove that this ego is what lets us act

All scientifically ,else fuck off

the things you say don't make any sense at all. your terms aren't well defined, and it's just senseless babble. it's not science. it's not philosophy. it's not logic. it's nothing.

>Solve the entire paradox this thread and countless research topics are about pls

Are you retarded?

That's like coming into discussion about black holes, demanding people answer "what are Singularities". Go away.

Provide me with a list of terms, I will only use those to explain it to you.

people who talk about black holes definitely know what singularities of a dynamical system are, you imbecile

>fancy term for "we don't know"
>BUT WE KNOW XD

yeah, no. you don't know shit and you're an idiotic schizophrenic babbling on about pseudo metaphysics

fuck off

This is definitely just a meme.

Identity is just a perception. If you transfer all aspects of your personality, you will be effectively transferring the perception of your identity along with them. You will not notice any difference or any break in your self-perception.

It's the same as with simulating your identity. In this case, however, if you do not destroy the original, as you are likely not to, the _original_ will feel like nothing happened to it, as it will not be able to perceive what its simulation is perceiving, even though in fact you will be in two places at once. You as the simulation, at least, will be astounded to see your original frustrated at the failure of the experiment. The only way to avoid this would be to create simulation with a direct link to your mind. However, with this link, both your original and the simulation will feel like one person, except with expanded powers of perception. To assure a seamless transition, processes in the brain will have to be shut down gradually, until finally only the simulation remains. Your simulation self will then feel as though its perception had been transferred in whole.

a singularity isn't a fancy term for we don't know, you imbecile
a singularity is a well defined mathematical term for points of a vector field

Alright, shitposter.

>babble on about "ego" and "consciousness" and a made up ill-defined "paradox"
>call others shitposters when they tell you to fuck off

what's next? you were only pretending to be retarded?

>imbecile
W-Well you're an asshat! Haha!

Which apart from agreeing that a Singularity is a point in space with no size and apparent infinite space curvature is exactly nothing you dumb nigger. Kill yourself.

Nice shitposting, cuck.

>oh no he showed I don't know what the fuck I'm talking about, better focus on him insulting me!