If you saw the Youtube channel Vsauce2's most recent Thought Glass video, Kevin mentions that teleportation, for lack of a better term, has been discovered to be possible. However, it's not so much teleportation as it is the destruction of an object and an exact reconstruction somewhere else, but I'll refer to it as teleportation for the sake of simplicity.
There are many problems with this. If we were to teleport a living human (Or any live subject for that matter), he would die. Even though an exact copy would be made, the original would certainly stay dead unless we also find a way to transport the original consciousness as well. In layman's terms, if you were teleported, you would go to whatever afterlife (or lack thereof) you believe in, assuming your belief is true, and there would be an exact copy of you somewhere on Earth.
Another problem would be data corruption. If you make a copy of a file, say, an image file, it would be almost perfectly similar to the original. However, some lines of the code would be slightly different. If you made a copy of that copy, and then a copy of that copy, and so on, the image will eventually become unrecognizable. Apply this to teleportation. This method of teleportation is effectively making a copy and deleting the original. If you were to teleport an excessive amount of times, you would theoretically become corrupted beyond recognition.
I just felt like sharing my opinion on the subject and see what others think. That said, does anyone have any comments on the matter?
Ending a post on the subject of teleportation with the word “matter”. Please tell me that wasn’t a pun
I first read an article about successful teleportation several years ago, but my memory is a bit sketchy. It had to do with Quantum Teleportation, so scientists discovered this a little while back. After reading up on a couple of newer articles, it seems they’re getting better at it. I had no idea, though, that it required the original data being teleported to be destroyed. I was hoping it was a viable means to eventually teleport life, but maybe it’s not.
I read another article a couple years later about another means of teleportation, which really wasn’t teleportation but it was supposed to be something similar to Star Trek. If I remember right, researchers found a way to break down matter and have it carried with some type of radio wave. After an extremely small distance, the object was reassembled successfully. But when the experiment was used on a germ, it died after being reassembled. They didn’t know why as it appeared to be reassembled perfectly. But, again, this isn’t actual teleportation, just a radio wave that travels near-light speed.
Concerning teleportation in general, it’s a great thing to experiment with and I hope I get to enjoy the benefits of it within my lifetime. But, I’m not sure about teleporting living things. There would have to be a mountain of evidence showing it’s not fatal to living things, then I might step into a teleporter. Until then, just find a way to let Burger King teleport me a Whopper and I’ll be happy
But you’re right about the making a copy of a copy thing. Such a teleporter would be useful for sending information and inorganic matter. For living things it wouldn’t be such a good idea. First, forget the fact that a copy of you would be made; you’re going to die via quantum teleportation. That’s the biggest red flag, for sure. Then to be copied over and over… yeah, eventually you’ll create a copy that’s just nothing like the original. It may not even be a functional being anymore. So, scientists have their work cut out for them over the coming decades. At some point, though, I’m sure we’ll figure out how to make it safe.
People actually still believe in an afterlife?
Were constantly damaging our dna every second anyway. Smoke a cigarette, have a few halfs and some beers and you'll have corrupted something. Clearly the technology would have to be mature before humans would use it.
Can't be worse than flying regardless.
First, yep, folks still believe in an afterlife. I’m a Christian myself, but it’s a genuine belief not simply dictated by the Bible and my society. I was allowed to question my beliefs, both as an American and as a Christian, and that kind of tolerance played a role in my decision to remain a Christian and still believe in my nation’s founding principles. I know lots of folks are Christians just in case Heaven might exist (Pascal’s Wager) and because they were raised that way. I was extremely fortunate to have a family that didn’t shove their beliefs down my throat, and to be born in a civilization that allows free thought.
Second, I agree we do lots of stuff that corrupts our bodies, but all that stuff doesn’t seem to end continuity of consciousness, which is the main point I think the OP was trying to make. Really, when it comes down to it, even the things we need in life destroys our bodies, including the oxygen we breathe. So, it’s impossible not to corrupt your body, you can only mitigate that corruption and try to live as healthy as possible to live as long as possible (which still doesn’t always results in a longer lifespan).
Finally, I have to agree with your last point… it can’t possibly be as bad as flying, unless your original body and mind doesn’t really get destroyed but transported to an airport where you never depart; you just wait, get your body violated by security, and wait some more.
I remember a quote (Author unknown) that went something like "When predicting the future advancement of technology, we tend to overestimate the short-term and underestimate the long-term."
Seeing as how 20 years would likely fall into the short-term, I'd lengthen that prediction by at least 50 years or so.
I'm an atheist, so no, I don't believe in any afterlife. Some people do, and I choose to respect their opinions.
You do have a point about the DNA damage, but I don't think it would be as safe as flying unless we find a different method that doesn't outright guarantee death.
I appreciate your respect for other people’s beliefs. Too bad more folks on the internet aren’t as tolerant, but that’s honestly the last thing I expect to see anywhere on the web. Your post is refreshing.
About the development of technology over time… it’s kind of hard to predict concerning certain fields. For instance, someone actually invented a flying car, but it’s nowhere near as cool and safe as the ones in Back to the Future; it’s the same deal with hoverboards.
In Star Trek, it’s kind of a mixed bag. Humans in the Star Trek universe don’t have cloaking for much of the series, but scientists have already been able to create materials that bend light (not perfectly, but after 300 more years they’ll have it figured perfectly out I’m sure). Also, no teleportation in the Trek Series; the transporters they use break down molecules, send them somewhere, and then reassemble them. Naturally, there may be an episode I missed in which they actually teleport, or some plot element I’ve forgotten about, but as far as I remember, no teleportation 300 years from now.
Also in the Trek Universe, each series had what you might equate to iPads and Smartphones. They got sleeker as the series progressed, but remember the stuff Kirk used? Some of it looked silly compared to it’s real-life modern counterparts. In many ways, we’re advancing far faster than the humans in the Trek Universe. In others, we’re not even close. As far as space travel goes, I think our advancement there depends on the condition of our planet. If global warming isn’t more seriously addressed, we might reach Trek type space travel pretty quickly (100-200 years). I mean, we
do have more worlds out there to pillage and destroy
I’d guess that teleportation will become viable with the next 50 years. However, if we hit that artificial intelligence “singularity” that AI researchers are always talking about, there’s no telling how far we’ll go in any amount of time.
I think I’ve said way too much here for anyone to want to read… but if you do, thanks
Take care.
