When a person is beamed up it's not the same person

[Luther Sloan]

The wormhole aliens existed outside linear time and at any one point in time there was only one Sisko.
Up to a point I agree with what you are saying. For all intents and purposes they are the same person in the same way that regenerated Spock was the same person. However, the reality is that they just APPEAR to be the same person because they have been reconstructed with the same DNA and the same memories. Technically, they are still copies.

Pauln6:

If the original Sisko died multiple times because of his constant use of the transporter and had been replaced with similar copies, then...

1. Why hasn't he or any other Starfleet officers discover any truth behind any physical or mental differences between the before and after versions of people during transport?

2. Why didn't the Wormhole Aliens look at Sisko as an impostor when he used the transporter so many times?

3. Why did the Wormhole Aliens decide to take him after he died in the Fire Caves and not when he died in the transporter for the first time (while he was replaced by a duplicate)?

In fact, in Sacrifice of Angels: The prophets had stopped him from ending his life when he decided to go up against a fleet of Dominion ships that were coming thru the wormhole. Why did they stop him then and not during any supposed transporter deaths?

I mean, seriously, if the transporter really was a doppelganger maker: would the Prophets be all that happy at the idea of their Emissary being killed and replaced by copies of himself over and over again?

If the transporter opened up a subspace corridor that they could step through, it would be the same person. However, their matter is destroyed and converted to energy. A living carbon life form cannot survive that!

That is why it is science fiction. There are many things within Star Trek that don't make sense and or will never happen (obviously). The transporter bends the normal rules of science as we know it and it de-materializes living and non living matter into energy for transport and then re-materializes it magically. It is a conversion of matter to energy and then back again. Just because it doesn't seem possible to you or me by normal science we use today, doesn't mean that is not how the device actually works within the show. Also, like I said before, you can die and you can still come back and be the same person, too. Death is not the defining factor of something being different or being a copy. However, death in the transporter could happen in .00000003rd of a second for all we know. It could be so fast and so instantaneous that it really wouldn't significantly be a definitive moment that would be a real death upon a person's life because it happens so quickly. However, there is evidence within Star Trek that your mind is perfectly preserved and living on as transporter energy during the transporter process within that fraction of a second (or seconds). Remember the DS9 episode titled "Our Man Bashir" where the memories of some of the command crew had been integrated into Doctor Bashir's spy program? How does the transporter store memories or the minds of people if they are no longer flesh and blood anymore?

Well, the answer is simple, the episode tells us very clearly that the mind lives on during the energy portion part of the transporter process. Any speculation beyond that is just that. Pure speculation with no real basis in fact within the official Star Trek universe.

In addition: I just watched the TNG episode "Second Chances" and it clearly tells us that Riker #2 is actually identical to Riker #1. It was further said that both Rikers are real and not some type of second rate copy or clone.

If your interested: Here are the scenes from the episode that confirm this...

http://www.tubechop.com/watch/67813

http://www.tubechop.com/watch/67815


Sources:
http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Our_Man_Bashir_(episode)
http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Second_Chances

 

[3D Master]

But transporters do not transport people physically intact from one place to another.

But transporters DO transport you physically intact from one place to another. Hence why Barclay and others could grab ahold of people in the matter stream and pull them out, intact:

1. the people that were pulled out themselves, although distorted as Barclay's mind tried to comprehend it, remained intact and could reach out desperately with their hands to the other people.

2. Barclay and co. themselves remained intact and conscious and could move about during the transportation process.

Transporters do not transform you into energy destroying your body; what they do, is transform you into a quantum foam, where you are your body intact, and formless energy at the same time. The energy can be manipulated and sent wherever without the limitations matter has, but matter remains secretly intact and gets reconstituted where the energy is sent to.

 

[Chrisisall]

No no no- the transporter does what a phaser does- it severs atomic bonds, but in the process, it "takes a quantum picture" of the pattern, then rebuilds said pattern with new matter.
The souls of the transportees then snap to the new bodies like a rubber band (soul energy is unquantifiable and ubiquitous).

 

[Chrisisall]

OR. Maybe I'm wrong.

Beam me up, 3D Master!

 

[Luther Sloan]

I don't know where folks get the idea that the transporter uses new matter to re-materialize a person. This simply is not true. Nowhere within any of the episodes or films even suggests this. The transporter takes apart your body and converts it into energy where your mind and self image of your self could continue on in an energy state where your body eventually gets put back together or phased back to it's normal physical form.

In fact, Dr Crusher confirms that Riker #1 is identical to Riker #2. If transporter travelers where a copy of the previous version, then it would been said within the series at some point.


Sources:
http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Our_Man_Bashir_(episode)
http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Realm_of_Fear
http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Second_Chances

 

[Chrisisall]

Non-sequitur; your facts are uncoordinated.

 

[Luther Sloan]

Please enlighten me. I would love to be proven wrong. So far I have cited references to various different Trek scenes and it has either been ignored or overlooked. I have yet for anyone to challenge what I really wrote in my previous posts.

All I heard was generalized opinions so far and no clear explanations with multi episodic references to back up those explanations.

Oh, and sorry. One reference is not going to do it. Unless it is explained in great pain staking detail from scenes in transcript or video form.

 

[Chrisisall]

All I heard was generalized opinions so far and no clear explanations with multi episodic references to back up those explanations.

My understanding of science combined with my understanding of the spiritual universal "battery" fuels my opinions on this topic.
Any further explanation would just be target practice for nitpickers.

 

[Luther Sloan]

There is a huge difference between some of the science on Star Trek and science in the real world. I mean, we don't hear explosions in space but yet they exist within Star Trek, among many other things. So if we are talking about a fictional technological device, we have to use all the rules of how that fictional universe defines that device for us. To not do so, is like making up your own rules during the middle of a game because you want to win.

 

[Chrisisall]

There is a huge difference between some of the science on Star Trek and science in the real world. I mean, we don't hear explosions in space but yet they exist within Star Trek, among many other things. So if we are talking about a fictional technological device, we have to use all the rules of how that fictional universe defines that device for us. To not do so, is like making up your own rules during the middle of a game because you want to win.

Fair enough to say.
Okay, as in the Trek universe, a Transporter *kills* you, then sucks the matter that makes you up to a different location, then re-makes you. Hence McCoy's hatred of the device. The idea of talking or moving when the process is in play is ludricrous, as evidenced in Piece Of The Action, when a flunky comments, "They can't do nothing till they're through sparklin'." The transporter obviously commits a force field around a person, and then makes way for the matter to be re-assembled in a vacuum at the target location.
My beliefs on the soul notwithstanding.

K?

 

[C.E. Evans]

But transporters do not transport people physically intact from one place to another.

But transporters DO transport you physically intact from one place to another.

No. In fact, that goes against everything that has ever been said onscreen about the transporter. Onscreen dialogue has said again and again and again that a person ISN'T transported intact from one place to another. That their bodies are deconstructed.

Hence why Barclay and others could grab ahold of people in the matter stream and pull them out, intact:

1. the people that were pulled out themselves, although distorted as Barclay's mind tried to comprehend it, remained intact and could reach out desperately with their hands to the other people.

2. Barclay and co. themselves remained intact and conscious and could move about during the transportation process.

I already discussed "Realm of Fear" at length several pages ago.

Transporters do not transform you into energy destroying your body; what they do, is transform you into a quantum foam, where you are your body intact, and formless energy at the same time. The energy can be manipulated and sent wherever without the limitations matter has, but matter remains secretly intact and gets reconstituted where the energy is sent to.

That's semantics and pretty much just a rephrasing of everything I said.

 

[Luther Sloan]

Fair enough to say.
Okay, as in the Trek universe, a Transporter *kills* you, then sucks the matter that makes you up to a different location, then re-makes you. Hence McCoy's hatred of the device. The idea of talking or moving when the process is in play is ludricrous, as evidenced in Piece Of The Action, when a flunky comments, "They can't do nothing till they're through sparklin'." The transporter obviously commits a force field around a person, and then makes way for the matter to be re-assembled in a vacuum at the target location.
My beliefs on the soul notwithstanding.

K?

Well, from looking at the episodes within Trek, the transporter...

1. Deconstructs your molecules and re-assembles them.
2. Turns you into energy during the transport process.
3. You can be aware of the process during transport.
4. Your personality can be still be captured in the energy matter phase.
5. You can be phased with a phase inverter during transport
6. Your body is a perfectly identical to the original ("Second Chances").
7. Your signal can degrade if you remain in the transporter buffer to long under normal conditions.

Numbers 3-5 suggest that your consciousness lives on during the transport process.

Number 6 tells us that you are not newly constructed matter or a copy.

 

[Chrisisall]

Well, from looking at the episodes within Trek, the transporter...

1. Deconstructs your molecules and re-assembles them.
2. Turns you into energy during the transport process.
3. You can be aware of the process during transport.
4. Your personality can be still be captured in the energy matter phase.
5. You can be pushed into another phase (like in TNG's "Next Phase").
6. Your body is a perfectly identical and real as the original ("Second Chances").
7. Your signal can degrade if you remain in the transporter buffer to long under normal conditions.

Agreed, but you can't do nothing till you're through sparklin'.

 

[Luther Sloan]

For the physical body... Yes. However, Reg did manage to grab on to a microbe during transport. Which suggests that his mental image or phased version of himself at least had movement. But, the microbe didn't materialize with him because the microbe existed on a microscopic level.

 

[3D Master]

Fair enough to say.
Okay, as in the Trek universe, a Transporter *kills* you, then sucks the matter that makes you up to a different location, then re-makes you. Hence McCoy's hatred of the device. The idea of talking or moving when the process is in play is ludricrous, as evidenced in Piece Of The Action, when a flunky comments, "They can't do nothing till they're through sparklin'." The transporter obviously commits a force field around a person, and then makes way for the matter to be re-assembled in a vacuum at the target location.
My beliefs on the soul notwithstanding.

K?

That would only be a flunky; and maybe in TOS there is something that is artificially forcing them to stay still. In the episode I mentioned, people indeed move during transportation and remain fully conscious. Which fits with the quantum foam intact/energy at the same time hypothesis.

But transporters do not transport people physically intact from one place to another.

But transporters DO transport you physically intact from one place to another.

No. In fact, that goes against everything that has ever been said onscreen about the transporter. Onscreen dialogue has said again and again and again that a person ISN'T transported intact from one place to another. That their bodies are deconstructed.

And that's the point. The body is INDEED deconstructed to an energy state, yet, it remains intact, AT THE SAME TIME. It is essentially a cousin of Shrodinger's Cat; dead and alive, intact and deconstructed at the same time.

Hence why Barclay and others could grab ahold of people in the matter stream and pull them out, intact:

1. the people that were pulled out themselves, although distorted as Barclay's mind tried to comprehend it, remained intact and could reach out desperately with their hands to the other people.

2. Barclay and co. themselves remained intact and conscious and could move about during the transportation process.

I already discussed "Realm of Fear" at length several pages ago.

I don't care. What happens in "Realm of Fear" fits and only fits the quantum foam, energy and bodily intact at the same time hypothesis.

Transporters do not transform you into energy destroying your body; what they do, is transform you into a quantum foam, where you are your body intact, and formless energy at the same time. The energy can be manipulated and sent wherever without the limitations matter has, but matter remains secretly intact and gets reconstituted where the energy is sent to.

That's semantics and pretty much just a rephrasing of everything I said.

No, it's something entirely different, but then you need to have at least a limited grasp of quantum physics to get it.

 

[C.E. Evans]

No. In fact, that goes against everything that has ever been said onscreen about the transporter. Onscreen dialogue has said again and again and again that a person ISN'T transported intact from one place to another. That their bodies are deconstructed.

And that's the point. The body is INDEED deconstructed to an energy state, yet, it remains intact, AT THE SAME TIME. It is essentially a cousin of Shrodinger's Cat; dead and alive, intact and deconstructed at the same time.

Changes nothing.

Hence why Barclay and others could grab ahold of people in the matter stream and pull them out, intact:

1. the people that were pulled out themselves, although distorted as Barclay's mind tried to comprehend it, remained intact and could reach out desperately with their hands to the other people.

2. Barclay and co. themselves remained intact and conscious and could move about during the transportation process.

I already discussed "Realm of Fear" at length several pages ago.

I don't care. What happens in "Realm of Fear" fits and only fits the quantum foam, energy and bodily intact at the same time hypothesis.

You need to care because you would realize then that I said the exact same thing several pages ago.

Once again, changes nothing from what I said earlier.

Transporters do not transform you into energy destroying your body; what they do, is transform you into a quantum foam, where you are your body intact, and formless energy at the same time. The energy can be manipulated and sent wherever without the limitations matter has, but matter remains secretly intact and gets reconstituted where the energy is sent to.

That's semantics and pretty much just a rephrasing of everything I said.

No, it's something entirely different,

No, it's not.

but then you need to have at least a limited grasp of quantum physics to get it.

You also need to have a limited grasp of english to know when someone has said the exact same thing earlier.

All you're doing is arguing over semantics.

 

[ProtoAvatar]

O'Brien's or the transporter inventor's technobabble is inconsistant with what WE KNOW the transporter can do - copy a human being.

No. Every scene within Star Trek needs to be considered and not ignored. You are twisting around what the series tells us about transporters. Pure and simple.

Give me some evidence that shows me different.
So far I have cited numerous examples within the series. So far your theories are just that. Theories. They are not based on anything that is actually within the show itself.

Proof? Already done:

"Yes - in order to copy a human being, one needs to have all information that describes this person (down to the quantum level, apparently) and one needs to have a huge amount of energy to 'build' the copy from scratch.

In 'Second chances' the transporter did exactly that. Riker1 AND Riker2.
Riker1 and Riker2 may be identical, physically and mentally - but they're different persons - twins, if you will. This becomes evident when you consider that one is on the Enterprise and one in a cardassian prison. This becomes evident when you put them in the same room and see that they're two distinct persons, not one person.

And, given the incredible precision work and huge energies needed to copy a human, a random phenomenon can't explain the EXACT copying of a person satisfactorily.
A random phenomenon would result in two puddles of organic goo that were once Riker."

Oh, and again, just to be clear: a copy is something that is not the original anymore. Like a song on a CD: the song is now a copy of the tune played in real time. The only way to hear that first original song that was being played for the first time is to be there when it originally happened (when it was being recorded).

Seeing the person who ends up on the other side of the transporter is indistinguishable (mentally and physically) from the person who went into into it from the start: They are essentially identical and not a copy.

Copies (like with clones) usually have a loss of quality or some type of noticeable degradation of some kind to set it apart from the original. That is not the case when it comes to the transporters. Otherwise the doctors of the 24th Century would have picked up on this important piece of information and limit how much a person could transport.

Now, my side of the argument is just my opinion of course. So please don't take it personally guys. I am just reporting my experience of how the transporter works in light of all of the information given to me by all of the series and not within just one episode.

Luther Sloan, your definition of a 'copy' is so limited, it's non-sensical.

Assume you have 2 dvds.
One is inscripted with a program - 0s and 1s.
The other is blank, until you burn the same program, the same 0s and 1s on it, making no mistake.
Now, you have 2 identical dvds - you hold one in each hand. One is the original, one is a copy (as in NOT the original you hold in the other hand.

You see, Luther Sloan, it doesn't matter how perfect a copy is - it's still a copy!

 

[Pauln6]

Fair enough to say.
Okay, as in the Trek universe, a Transporter *kills* you, then sucks the matter that makes you up to a different location, then re-makes you. Hence McCoy's hatred of the device. The idea of talking or moving when the process is in play is ludricrous, as evidenced in Piece Of The Action, when a flunky comments, "They can't do nothing till they're through sparklin'." The transporter obviously commits a force field around a person, and then makes way for the matter to be re-assembled in a vacuum at the target location.
My beliefs on the soul notwithstanding.

K?

Well, from looking at the episodes within Trek, the transporter...

1. Deconstructs your molecules and re-assembles them.
2. Turns you into energy during the transport process.
3. You can be aware of the process during transport.
4. Your personality can be still be captured in the energy matter phase.
5. You can be pushed into another phase (like in TNG's "Next Phase").
6. Your body is a perfectly identical to the original ("Second Chances").
7. Your signal can degrade if you remain in the transporter buffer to long under normal conditions.

Numbers 3-5 suggest that your consciousness lives on during the transport process.

Number 6 tells us that you are not newly constructed matter or a copy.

I agree that ordinarily the body is reconstructed using the same matter but that does not have to be the case (Kirk, Riker) and we have instances of 'boosting the matter gain' where they add in energy to make up any that is lost.

I also agree that this is a philosophical question as well as a (Trek) scientific one. Recent studies on twins have shown that our personalities (perhaps well over 50%) are dependent on our genes. If you transport somebody to energy their DNA cannot possibly be intact while that person is in transport because DNA is physical. Memories are stored chemically in the brain and these experiences shape the remainder of our personalities. However, Trek has established ways to store memories artificially (Korby, Data, Ilia etc) so it is possible to store memories as part of the transporter pattern as well as logging the DNA code (which is different from the DNA existing as a physical being).

So if you believe on a philosophical level that consciousness (as opposed to memory and personality) can also be stored 'alive' within the transporter beam then it is not a completely 'new' copy that materialises on the pad; it's a physical copy of the DNA and chemical memories in whichthe original 'consciousness' is housed.

I find that more of a stretch personally particularly as both Kirks and both Rikers were conscious and self aware. This would suggest that the human consciousness is capable to beiing artificially duplicated within a transporter beam and that just seems odd. It's more likely that 23rd century people don't really have an issue with living (and 'dying') in this way. Spock and Kim both got on with their lives in spite of not being the 'originals'.

I think the whole Barclay episode is a bit of an aberration. However, I recall vaguely that pretty much all of his peceptions and activities were in the micro-second before he dematerialised. I don't think people are self-aware while in transport. Without a brain or any sensory organs I don't see how that is possible. Having said that, we have instances of self-aware clouds of gas and energy, so it's not impossible in the world of Trek.

In short, part of this argument depends what you mean by a 'copy' and whether you believe that we have a separate 'soul' that already consists of energy and is capable of being transported in teh matter stream without being altered. I'm just not that romantic or religious, so meh. As far as I'm concerned, if the non-religious 23rd century aliens have put aside the concept of the soul they may well have absolutely no problem believing that a person is real as long as they have the same DNA, the same bodily experiences, and the same memories.

Chemically created clones that are deliberate copies of individuals can also be seeded with the 'real' person's memories but they are still copies in the truest sense of the word because their bodies have not been through the same physical processes as the original (and clones do have legal rights). A transporter copy is copied down to the sub-atomic level and for all intents and purposes, the body reproduced is exactly the same as the one that was decontructed and this may be where the definition of a 'copy' gets fuzzy.

 

[T'Girl]

Luther Sloan, your definition of a 'copy' is so limited, it's non-sensical. Assume you have 2 dvds. One is inscripted with a program - 0s and 1s. The other is blank, until you burn the same program, the same 0s and 1s on it, making no mistake. Now, you have 2 identical dvds - you hold one in each hand. One is the original, one is a copy (as in NOT the original you hold in the other hand. You see, Luther Sloan, it doesn't matter how perfect a copy is - it's still a copy!

But here ProtoAvatar is where your own use of language defeats your own argument and your own basic theory.

If my musical band goes into a studo and records a DVD, you ProtoAvatar could take that DVD and play it for Luther Sloan over the internet (Luther Sloan's in another city), Luther Sloan burns a copy. Okay, in that case what Luther Sloan in fact has is a copy. However your DVD is also a copy, because the only original music here is what my band played in the studio. What you possess might be a first generation recording, but it is a recording, a copy of the live music.

What walks into the transporter chamber isn't your first generation DVD, what walks into the chamber is my live band. The transporter is like a road trip. If ProtoAvatar wants to listen to the original music, the live band has to come to your house, if you want Luther Sloan to listen to the original music you would have to sent the live band to his house.

What re-material-izes on the planet's surface is the actual living breathing live band, it isn't a perfectly made first generation DVD. The transporter isn't "burning a copy " of Riker when one of the two containment beams get reflected back to the surface of Nervala Four. It's like the pre-mentioned band walks into a room and then, "Science Fictionally" the band walks in a second time.

To review, the Potemkin's Transporter Chief was beaming up one William Riker from Nervala Four, when the distortion field surged, the Chief was worried about losing Riker's incoming complete pattern using one containment beam (chickens in one basket), so the Chief split the containment beam in two, at this point the one and only Riker is "Science Fictionally" traveling back to the ship on two separate pathways, but there is only one Riker, not a Riker and a DVD. The Chief planned to reintegrate the double Riker pattern in the transport buffer if any of the Riker pattern was partial disintegrated, but that wasn't necessary and the Chief shut down one of the containment beams. Remember, the two containment beams in total hold a single Riker.

One of the containment beams containing the whole Riker pattern was reflected back to the surface.
Rematerializing in the station.

One of the containment beams containing the whole Riker pattern made it safely to the ship.
Rematerializing on the pad.

The two Rikers are the one Riker who dematerialized in the station.

RIKER: Which one of them is real?
LAFORGE: That's the thing. Both. You were both materialised from a complete pattern.

I mean come on ProtoAvatar, LaForge comes right out and says it.

 

[ProtoAvatar]

T'Girl

Very well, let's start from the beginning of the causal chain:

First, let's define the item:
I define the item as a dvd with the necessay information on it.
As such, the original dvd will be the one recorded when the band plays in a studio.

All the other dvds will be copies of it and copies of copies, they are obviously not the original one.

You see, T'girl, when you have two dvds/Rikers in a room, if one of them is the original, the other one is, by definition, a copy. What they can't be is two originals (because there was only one original dvd as there was only one original Riker who stepped on the transporter platform).

Riker1 is the original and Riker2 a copy - meaning the transporter works by creating copies and - normally - killing the original (who can be retrieved alive).

PS -All LaForge says is that the two 'dvds' contain the same information (the same 'complete pattern'). And both 'dvds' - the original and the copy - are, of course, 'real', none is imaginary.
Further, I wouldn't put much weight on what these persons say with regards the transporter - these persons kill any transported person as a matter of course; of course their views will excuse this by claiming that the original and the copy are interchangeable; it's OK to kill the original if you make a copy first.