• Buddahriffic@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    21 hours ago

    Has it ever been proven in any of the shows that the transporter didn’t kill everyone that used it and just made such prefect copies that no one realized?

    Like it created an extra copy of Riker and there was the tragedy of Tuvix. Though I’d say the former is evidence that it is new copies but the latter might be evidence against it, since they each had memories of their time merged when they separated. Actually, that whole incident kinda brings into question what’s going on for a transporter to accidentally merge two people and not in a “horrible teleportation into a wall accident” way and then somehow de-merge them.

    • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      8 hours ago

      it’s just the ship of theseus, at what point do you consider it a new ship?

      like think about it, people only start questioning if it’s the same person after they learn how transporters work, doesn’t that indicate that it really doesn’t matter? if people can go their entire lives with neither them nor anyone around them noticing a difference, how could they somehow be a different person?

    • dzsimbo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Yeah, there definitely are some waved away elements that are basically magic. I’m just binging TNG now, but I saw the Lower Decks tribute to many-a transporter incidents.

      I mean if you can transport and not at the same time (the copy version), it is not hard to think that once that buffer is cleared on the one side, it’s game over man.

      • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 hours ago

        it’s only a problem if you think the sole thing defining “you” is an intangible soul that for some reason wouldn’t just transfer between or get copied alongside instances of yourself

        the line of reasoning you talk about has always been so strange to me, you’d be talking to a person walking out of a transporter and insist they’re dead, as they look you in the eye and ask if that’s an insult

        • dzsimbo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 hours ago

          I had a similar argument with a friend, and I think he won that time. It came out of left field and rephrases the whole thought experiment.

          Instead of me defending the argument, how would you interpret a clone incident? Would you get ‘the other feed’ as well? We have the sleep cycle where we don’t actively get input (even though our conciousness is present during dreams to a certain extent). So if a transporter clone incident rebuilds the person on the other side, but an original instant could go on experiencing a life that wouldn’t be if the transporter functioned correctly.

          Hopefully that took the soul out of your argument!

          • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            cloning is pretty simple: you end up in both places. there’s no magical continuity of experience, both clones are equal and will 100% feel like the original and have equally valid claims to such, and to a third observer it would basically just look like two very confused identical twins who share their memories before the cloning.
            You obviously wouldn’t end up with a single conscience experiencing both points of view at once, lmao.

            it’s just like copying data on a computer, it’s all the same data so it’s nonsensical to call any copy the “original”.