Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site netex.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!qantel!dual!lll-crg!seismo!trwrdc!rlgvax!hadron!netex!ewiles
From: ewiles@netex.UUCP (Ed Wiles)
Newsgroups: net.sf-lovers
Subject: Re: Matter Transmission/identity on file
Message-ID: <122@netex.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 25-Sep-85 16:24:07 EDT
Article-I.D.: netex.122
Posted: Wed Sep 25 16:24:07 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 30-Sep-85 02:02:38 EDT
References: <3645@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU> <1180@mtgzz.UUCP>
Organization: NetExpress, Inc., Vienna, VA
Lines: 63
Summary: Original .vs. Indistinguishable Copy

>
>[Keith Lynch:]
> Postultimate thought: if you put yourself on file could
> you ever truly die?
>
>[James J. Lippard:]
> Sure.  If all the copies get wiped out...
>
>[Mark Leeper:]
> I think that there is a misconception here.  Your species remains
> reconstructable while your genetic code is on file, but you do not.
>
>[(Sorry, I lost the name.)]
> *If* just the genetic code is on file.  If all the information about
> your identity was put on file, you *could* come back...
>
>[Mark Leeper:]
> OK, so there is more of you on file than just your genetic code.  Then
> a new copy is made.  I think the point still is valid.  As far as the
> world is concerned you are alive, but that is an illusion.  You are
> dead.  There just is a perfect copy around that thinks it is you.
                         ------------
                         (Key words!)

I seem to remember something called the Turring Test.  In effect, if you
cannot tell the difference between two "things/people/etc...", then there
*is* *no* *difference*!!!!

> The fact that two or three of these things can be made is the clincher.
> They can't all be the original.

By the definition above, why not?  At the time of their creation/construction
(whatever), they *are* the original. (Remember, A difference that you cannot
see is not a difference. And don't pick on the word "see", you know what I
mean.) I do agree, that with time, they will  probably not develop in the
same way as the first would have.  If you inform them that they were not the
first in the series, this would have an effect on them that the first would
not have encountered.  If you attempt to hide this from them, that attempt
would also have an effect on them. Though not as severe as the prior one
would.

> Take my word for it, if you are destroyed and replaced by an exact copy
> with your mind, you are dead.  The exact copy is only that.  I know.
> It happens to me every night.

The first sentence is apparently an attempt to "prove-by-authority", I
knew about, and disregarded, this method long before my college class in
logic. The second sentence I have already dealt with above.  The third,
and fourth sentences seem to be mildly sarcastic and, if that is how they
were meant, should have had a "smiley" after them. (I could be wrong, maybe
he does die every night. My question then: Do you beleive in, and or have
proof of, reincarnation? :-) )

					E. L. Wiles

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote: Time, Aug 12 1985, pg 23, William Safire:

		"...Politics without a villain is like
			a lens without a focal point."

Disclaimer: My remarks are related only to my own mind, and sometimes
	    not even to that!


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com