View Full Version : Human teleportation getting closer
SUBMAN1
07-12-07, 05:14 PM
Scientists find way to teleport atoms on optic fibres
By Mark Schliebs
July 10, 2007 11:55am
AUSTRALIAN physicists have discovered a method that could see atoms being teleported between Sydney and Perth and pave the way for possible Star Trek-like travel in the future.
The method involves cooling down a group of atoms and shooting lasers at them, making them "appear to disappear" before using transporting them along optic fibres at light speed to another location where they can be reconstructed.
The "simple" way of transporting atoms was developed by physicists Murray Olsen, Ashton Bradley, Simon Haine of the Australian Research Council Centre for Quantum-Atom Optics, and and Joseph Hope of ANU.
Dr Olsen told NEWS.com.au the method was very much like the Star Trek characters' favourite way to get back onto the ship.
The atoms are cooled to almost absolute zero, or -273C. At a billionth of a degree above this temperature, a quirk of physics makes all the atoms start behaving in the same way. Then the scientists zap them with two lasers.
“If you cool these atoms down enough ... in a condensate, they all enter the same quantum state,” Dr Olsen said.
“When a few thousand atoms are overlapping (and you hit them with the laser beams)… they basically disappear.
“We can use an optic fibre (to transport the signal at the speed of light) into a second condensate, which could be in another room, or another building, or another state.
“We’ve got the coldest thing in the universe and the fastest speed in the universe.”
Experiments
He said the method could be being used in laboratories in the next four years, but didn't expect he would ever see humans teleported.
Dr Haine said the team’s method was a lot simpler than previous theories.
Dr Haine also said their method would reconstruct the atoms better once transported, compared to the “entanglement” theory.
“As our scheme doesn’t rely on the quality of the entanglement, it may be possible to achieve more accurate teleportation via this method,” Dr Haine said.
Another scientist at ANU, Dr John Close, intends to implement the experiments over the coming years.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22048954-2,00.html
Camaero
07-12-07, 05:24 PM
Damn, if we don't die from a comet or blow ourselves up with nukes then the future is pretty sweet! :)
Though I've heard that Star Trek teleportation was impossible basically because the act of teleporting isn't actually moving anything but of destroying the atoms at one end and creating them at the other. Then you aren't beaming someone but killing them and duplicating them, and even then if it could reach that scale of function you don't know if the person would actually live through it.
I think its just a bit of dramatic fluff really. Lasers, yes. Warp speed, probably. Teleportation? Naw.
Though I've heard that Star Trek teleportation was impossible basically because the act of teleporting isn't actually moving anything but of destroying the atoms at one end and creating them at the other. Then you aren't beaming someone but killing them and duplicating them, and even then if it could reach that scale of function you don't know if the person would actually live through it.
Yes, AFAIK our current level of 'teleportation' just entails reading the configuration of atom X and reconfiguring atom Y to be the same. 'Replication' is probably a better word for this.
Well I know for a fact that there are aliens that have teleported people to my hometown, because it's full of people that are most definitely 'not from this planet'
:rotfl:
:D Chock
The Avon Lady
07-12-07, 11:24 PM
"Help me-e-e-e-e-e-e!!!! Help me-e-e-e-e-e-e!!!!"
http://img47.imageshack.us/img47/7376/flydf10ee6.jpg
kiwi_2005
07-12-07, 11:29 PM
Though I've heard that Star Trek teleportation was impossible basically because the act of teleporting isn't actually moving anything but of destroying the atoms at one end and creating them at the other. Then you aren't beaming someone but killing them and duplicating them, and even then if it could reach that scale of function you don't know if the person would actually live through it.
I think its just a bit of dramatic fluff really. Lasers, yes. Warp speed, probably. Teleportation? Naw.
Yeah i read the same, but it would be great if they found a way to teleport humans imagine that, no more need to fly everyone in the far furture would have a teleport machine in their home it would be as common as a Television,. Well im off to paris for the weekend, you step on the panel push some buttons and zap your in paris. Would be no need for roads, transport everything would be teleported.
Maybe in 10,000 years in the future human teleportation might happen, till then experimental teleportation of humans will end with results similar to the Ripley clones in Aliens Resurrection:cool:
:roll:
Soon all your bases will be transported to us!
I love the "teleporter paradox". Its a phillosophical paradox that goes thusly:
"The year is 2500, and teleportation technology has been perfected for use on humans in interstellar travels. This is how the human teleporter works: instead of actually sending you (with all of your atoms) through space-time, it simply scans your body, capturing all the information on every subatomic particle in your body at an instant (assume that they got around Heisenberg's uncertainty principle), at which point your body is destroyed (don't worry, you are put under anaesthetic for the procedure), while the information of those atoms gets transmitted to the destination, where a machine will synthesise an exact replica of you (exactly the same down to the subatomic level) using new atoms. You then wake up in a different galaxy (after the anaesthetics wear off - and the anaesthetics would also be 'teleported' by the way), with all your memory before the teleportation intact, convinced that you have survived the procedure. Of course the atoms are all new, but isn't the new body still the same 'you'? (In real life, every atom in our body eventually gets replaced anyway.)
Now let's add a twist. Instead of destroying your original body, it is preserved during the scanning process. So now we have TWO copies of you: the original one, and the replica. Both of them are identical down to the last atom, and should be behaviourally indistinguishable (because they have the same physical makeup, materialism states that they must be identical in every way.) But surely you can't be in two places at once! If 'you' survived at all, isn't it obvious that you survive as your original self, not the clone? But what's the difference between your original self and the clone anyway? Both of you would behave in exactly the same way, and both would have the same thoughts (at least initially, when there has been no divergence in the environment). So did you really survive the procedure afterall? If you didn't, doesn't that point to the existence of something other than your physical body including the information contained within the arrangement of the atoms? Is there a difference between the scenario with one original body and one clone, and the scenario where I destroy your original body, and create two(or more!) clones instead? In each case, is it so clear that 'you' will survive, and survive in one of the individuals/clones?"
One thing to keep in mind when thinking over this paradox is the fact that you have very, very few of the atoms in your body that you where born with.
bookworm_020
07-12-07, 11:55 PM
I remeber reading somewhere that even if you transport a human and rebuild them in one piece, you would turn their brain state back to the equiviant of a new born child.
The Avon Lady
07-12-07, 11:57 PM
I remeber reading somewhere that even if you transport a human and rebuild them in one piece, you would turn their brain state back to the equiviant of a new born child.
Therefore, remember to include a package of Pampers in every shipment.
By those theories we can come to the conclusion that life is not just the atomic makeup of our bodies but also consists of our "soul" aka life.
http://www.ritilan.com/archives/images/blogimages/082404_planet_of_the_apes_twilight_zone_remix.JPG
I remeber reading somewhere that even if you transport a human and rebuild them in one piece, you would turn their brain state back to the equiviant of a new born child.
From a strictly scientific point of view, if you put every atom and sub-atom in the correct position, includeing all the chemicals and connections of the brain, then the new person should have all the memorys of the old one and his/her stream of concousness would not be modifyed.
This is a scientific point of view because it assumes that thought and consciousness are products of the physical state of the brain.
By those theories we can come to the conclusion that life is not just the atomic makeup of our bodies but also consists of our "soul" aka life.
If only that was a logical conclusion, then so many questions would be answered and the deportation paradox would no longer be a paradox.
There is no way we can come to such a conclusion with out physically trying the paradox.
It is just one of 2 main conclusions; either:
1) Consciousness and thought are results of physical brain states and the teleportation will not alter the stream of consciousness.
or
2) Consciousness and thought are non-physical and teleportation will alter the stream of consciousness.
Option '2' comes with it's own set of questions:
a) To what is the stream of consciousness attached?
b) How does something non-physical interact with something physical?
Option '1' is more simple, but more puzzling. It does not throw up any major logic puzzles, but it supposes that all qualia (including that of consciousness) are physical. This is counterintuitive because that does not seam to be how we experience qualia. If you thus take option '1' to be false; a new paradox arises: How would we experience the world differently if all qualia where physical?
It is a very interesting subject to think about. I must admit that i'm not on an educated level to keep up (i understood what you said yet have never encountered the word qualia) however I do think that many questions would be answered if we could attempt a 'perfect teleport.'
Now let's add a twist. Instead of destroying your original body, it is preserved during the scanning process. So now we have TWO copies of you: the original one, and the replica. Both of them are identical down to the last atom, and should be behaviourally indistinguishable (because they have the same physical makeup, materialism states that they must be identical in every way.)
Hey! I saw that episode of Star Trek too!
The Avon Lady
07-13-07, 01:59 AM
This gives a whole new purpose to trojan coders and hackers.
It is a very interesting subject to think about. I must admit that i'm not on an educated level to keep up (i understood what you said yet have never encountered the word qualia) however I do think that many questions would be answered if we could attempt a 'perfect teleport.'
Gah! Sorry about the jargon!
Qualia is a philosophical term.
In the most simple usage "qualia" are any feelings or sensations. Like the colour green or the taste of garlic.
i.e.
If a tree falls in the wood and no one is around to hear it, it makes sound waves, but it does not make the qualia of the sound of a tree falling.
Smaragdadler
07-13-07, 02:40 AM
Some (longer) copy&paste. In a way even off-topic. You can skip it, if not interested. But it's some cool out-off-the-box thinking, and goes a little bit about the fundamental problems Letum has scratched...
http://www.criesofhate.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2007/04/aleister-crowley.jpg
The knowledge of exoteric science is comically limited by the fact that we have no access, except in the most indirect way, to any other celestial body than our own. In the last few years, the semi-educated have got an idea that they know a great deal about the universe, and the principal ground for their fine opinion of themselves is usually the telephone or the airship. It is pitiful to read the bombastic twaddle about progress, which journalists and others, who wish to prevent men from thinking, put out for consumption. We know infinitesimally little of the material universe. Our detailed knowledge is so contemptibly minute, that it is hardly worth reference, save that our shame may spur us to increased endeavour. Such knowledge - [Knowledge is, moreover, an impossible conception. All propositions come ultimately back to "A is A".] - as we have got is of a very general and abstruse, of a philosophical and almost magical character. This consists principally of the conceptions of pure mathematics. It is, therefore, almost legitimate to say that pure mathematics is our link with the rest of the universe and with "God".
...
In old times, it was supposed that the Earth was the centre of the Universe. The Heavens being above the Earth-they did not realise them as being equally below it-they were accounted as of the Divine Nature. And as they recognised imperfections and irregularity in mundane affairs, they thought that the movements of the Heavenly Bodies, which they observed to be regular, must be perfect. They then started some apiori thinking. Their mathematicians had the idea that a Circle was a perfect figure; therefore (they said, with characteristic theological reasoning) all heavenly bodies must move in circles.1 This religious assumption caused great trouble to the astronomers. As their measurements became more extended and accurate, they found it increasingly difficult to reconcile observation with theory, at least to do so without putting themselves to vast inconvenience in their calculations. So they invented "cycles" and "epicycles" to explain the observed movements. Ultimately Copernicus was goaded by this annoyance to suggest that it would really be very much more convenient (if only the idea were not so wicked) to imagine that the Sun, and not the Earth, was the centre of the System. In mathematics there are no fixed facts. Bertrand Russell says that in this subject "nobody knows what he is talking about, and it matters to nobody whether he is right or wrong". For example: Begin with the assumption that the Moon is the immovable centre of the Universe. Nobody can contradict it; one simply switches the calculations over to suit. The practical objection to this is that it would not facilitate the work of navigators. It is important to have this idea in one's mind, because otherwise one fails to grasp the whole spirit of modern Science-Philosophy. It does not aim at Truth; it does not conceive of Truth (in any ordinary sense of the word) as possible; it aims at maximum convenience. They did not understand that the Circle is only one case of the Ellipse: that in which the foci coincide.
...
A short digression. One of the most important doctrines of the Ancients was that of the Macrocosm and the Microcosm. Man is himself a little Universe; he is a minute copy of the big Universe.
...
There are only two operations possible in the Universe, Analysis and Synthesis. To divide, and to unite. Solve et coagula: said the Alchemists.
If anything is to be changed, either one must divide one object into two parts, or add another unit to it. This principle lies at the basis of all scientific thought and work.
The first thought of the man of science is Classification, Measurement. He says, "This oak-leaf is like that oak-leaf; this oak-leaf is unlike this beech-leaf". Until one has grasped this fact, one has not begun to understand Scientific Method.
...
The business of Science is to explore Nature. It's first questions are, What is this? How did it come to be? What are its relations with any other object? The knowledge acquired may then be used in Applied Science, which asks: How can we best employ such-and-such a thing or idea for the purpose that, to us, seems fit? An example may make this clear.
The Greeks of old were aware that by rubbing amber (which they called Electron) upon silk, the amber acquired the power of attracting to itself light objects such as small pieces of paper. But there they stopped. Their science was hoodwinked by theological and philosophical theories of the a priori type. It was well over 2,000 years before this phenomenon was correlated with other electrical phenomena. The idea of Measurement was hardly known to anyone but mathematicians like Archimedes, and astronomers. The founda'tions of Science, as it is understood to-day, were hardly laid at all 200 years ago. There was an immense amount of knowledge; but it was nearly all qualitative. The classification of phenomena depended chieflv upon poetic analogies. The doctrines of "correspondences" and signatures" were based upon fanciful resemblances. Cornelius Agrippa wrote of the "antipathy" between a Dolphin and a Whirlpool If a meretrix sat under an olive tree, it would bear no more fruit. If anything looked like something else, it partook in some mysterious way of its qualities.
...
This sounds to-day to many people mere superstitious ignorance and nonsense; but it is not altogether so. The old system of classification was sometimes good and sometimes bad, as far as it went. But in no case did it go very far. The natural ingenuity of their natural philosophers did compensate very largely for the weakness of their theory; and it did ultimately lead them (especially through Alchemy, where they were forced by the nature of the work to add real to their ideal observation) to introduce the idea of Measure. Modern Science, intoxicated by the practical success which attended this innovation, has simply shut the door on anything that cannot be measured. The Old Guard refuses to discuss it. But the loss is immense. Obsession with strictly physical qualities has blocked out all real human values.
...
The theory of Animism was always present in the minds of the mediaeval masters. Any natural object possessed not only its material characteristics, but was a manifestation of a more or less tangible idea on which it depended. The Pool was a pool, true; but also there was a nymph whose home it was. In her turn, she was dependent on a superior kind of nymph, who was much less closely attached to any given pool, but more to pools in general; and so on, up to the supreme Lady of Water, who exercised a general supervision over her whole dominion. She, of course, was subject to the General Ruler of all the Four Elements. It was exactly the same idea as in the case of the police constable, who has his sergeant, inspector, superintendent, commissioner, always getting more cloudy and remote until you reach the shadowy Home Secretary, who is, himself, the servant of a completely intangible and incalculable phantom called The Will of the People.
...
We may doubt how far the personification of these entities was conceived as real by the ancients; but the theory was that while anyone with a pair of eyes could see the pool, he could not see the nymph except by some accident. But they thought that a superior type of person, by dint of searching, study and experiment, might acquire this general power. A person still more advanced in this science could get into real connection with the superior, because subtler, forms of Life. He could perhaps cause them to manifest themselves to him in material shape.
A good deal of this rests upon the Platonic ideology, which maintained that any material object was an impure and imperfect copy of some ideal perfection. So men who wished to advance in spiritual science and philosophy strove always to formulate for themselves the pure idea. They tried to proceed from the Particular to the General; and this principle has been of the greatest service to ordinary science. The mathematics of 6+5=11, and 12+3=15, was all in bits. Advance only came when they wrote down their equations in general terms. X2Y2=(X +Y) (X-Y) covers all possible cases of subtracting the square of one number from the square of another. So the Meaningless and Abstract, when understood, has far more meaning than the Intelligible and Concrete.
...
Victorian science, flushed with its victory over Supernaturalism, was quite right to declare the Immeasurable "Out of Bounds". It had a right to do so on technical grounds, and it was a strategical necessity of its offensive; but it hampered itself by limiting its scope. It laid itself open to the deadliest attacks from Philosophy. Then, especially from the angle of Mathematical Physics, its own generals betrayed its dogmatism. The essence of Science to-day is far more mysterious than the cloudiest speculations of Leibnitz, Spinoza or Hegel; the modern definition of Matter reminds one irresistibly of the definition of Spirit given by such mystics as Ruysbroek, Boehme and Molinos. The idea of the Universe in the mind of a modern mathematician is singularly reminiscent of the ravings of William Blake.
But the mystics were all wrong when they were pious, and held that their mysteries were too sacred to analyse. They ought to have brought in the idea of Measure. This is exactly what was done by the magicians and Qabalists. The difficulty has been that the units of measurement have themselves been somewhat elastic; they even tend to be literary. Their definitions were as circular as, but not more fugitive than, the definitions of the physicists of to-day. Their methods were empirical, though they strove to make them accurate, as well as lack of precise measures and standard apparatus permitted, because they had not yet formulated any true scientific theory. But their successes were numerous. All depended on individual skill. One would rather trust oneself in illness to the born physician than to the laboratory experts of Battle Creek.
One of the great differences between ancient and modern Chemistry is the idea of the Alchemists that substance in its natural state is, in some way or other, a living thing. The modern tendency is to insist on the measurable. One can go into a museum and see rows of glass globes and bottles which contain the chemical substances which go to make up the human body; but the collection is very far from being a man. Still less does it explain the difference between Lord Tomnoddy and Bill Sykes.
------
source: passages taken from Aleister Crowleys "The Book of Thoth" and "Magick"
HunterICX
07-13-07, 03:41 AM
Ok lets run a Test!
Errr...Sir?
Yeh?
I think something whent wrong
what?
well, I never knew you where an Arseface
Am I talking from below?
yes
Dear GOD!:huh:
I know there is a cat in there somewhere. :|\\
Both of you would behave in exactly the same way, and both would have the same thoughts (at least initially, when there has been no divergence in the environment).
For awhile yes, not for long however, you shall learn new people, you shall discover new technics, climate (other galaxy), new food, etcetera etcetera.
Both of you will go there own way and change.
I think your theory is a interesting one.:hmm:
Okay, it took me a while, but I managed to knock up a teleportation device from some things lying around in my shed. Then I tested the theory out:
At first I only cautiously teleported myself two feet to the left, but then of course I realised that this was pointless, because I could have just jumped there. So I teleported myself further, choosing Sainsburys supermarket up the road as my test destination, and here are my observations:
1. Never teleport yourself to Sainsburys supermarket up the road without an umbrella or a big coat, when it is raining.
2. Remember to take either A. your wallet, or B. another teleportation device, otherwise you will have to walk back to your shed where the teleportation device is, in order to switch it off.
Tune in next week, when I will be constructing a time machine, going back in time and killing my grandparents.
:D Chock
Tchocky
07-13-07, 07:03 AM
http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y282/Custer1/misc/sign01.jpg
Although Chock, if you're going back in time remember to bring lots of stamps, glue, letters and envelopes. You'll be going to a more primitive version of general Topics, and they don't call it "posting" for nothing.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.