The moon landings weren't real, why should Star Treks transporter be?
Gotta go, I'm late for my flat earth society meeting.

Take the car.
The moon landings weren't real, why should Star Treks transporter be?
Gotta go, I'm late for my flat earth society meeting.
I think you're equating intelligence/reasoning with consciousness.
You must be a robot then. As Descartes concluded, it is really the only thing existence of which we can know for sure."Consciousness' gets tossed around like "aether." The supposed phenomenon to which it refers is not in evidence.
This is dismissive without being compelling."Consciousness' gets tossed around like "aether." The supposed phenomenon to which it refers is not in evidence.
Cars are extremely dangerous but we get into them every day.
Seriously, McCoy should sought medical treatment for his irrational phobia. Transporting (in his time and after) seemed safe as flying.
During ENT we got fed a line about them being very iffy but no accidents occurred that I can recall.
It is fixed in the body, and if you put the body back together you put the consciousness back together too.If consciousness isn't fixed within the body, then why do people die when they're vaporized?![]()
That's just a myth. No one has ever come back from being vaporized to describe their experience.If consciousness isn't fixed within the body, then why do people die when they're vaporized?![]()
How very nihilistic.I have no doubt that the transporter physics, as represented in the Star Trek mythos - matter to energy to matter - means death and recreation of a copy, regardless of what the copy thinks upon reassembly. The willingness of the characters to use it implies that's not so, but it's a contradiction in the fiction - not science. The only way that a death would not be involved is a portal technology like the Iconians, but that's not the same technology.
Oh man that's cute!Cats and canon, serious business.
![]()
So if I disassemble my bike, put it in a box, and take it into another place and then reassemble the bike, then it is a different bike?I have no doubt that the transporter physics, as represented in the Star Trek mythos - matter to energy to matter - means death and recreation of a copy, regardless of what the copy thinks upon reassembly. The willingness of the characters to use it implies that's not so, but it's a contradiction in the fiction - not science. The only way that a death would not be involved is a portal technology like the Iconians, but that's not the same technology.
Well, it clearly lost its soul, that's for sureSo if I disassemble my bike, put it in a box, and take it into another place and then reassemble the bike, then it is a different bike?
No, it's the same bike, sans a few atoms that fell off in the process.So if I disassemble my bike, put it in a box, and take it into another place and then reassemble the bike, then it is a different bike?
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.