pugh@topaz.RUTGERS.EDU (09/24/85)
From: "pugh jon%e.mfenet"@LLL-MFE.ARPA
It seems to me that some points of which we all should be aware have
been missed. Assume the following:
We have a device capable of recording an object's entire atomic state and
recreate it. It doesn't matter whether the recording process is destructive
or not. If it is we can build a new one immediately; if not we have only a
duplicator.
The big question is: Can LIFE be duplicated? If it cannot, we only have
a replacement for cargo transportation, assuming a certain cost level. Let's
assume it works on life though. Creatures notice no ill effects and people
feel continuous through the process.
What we have here is a way of spawning processes. We can essentially create
sentient life. The recorded atomic state is our pattern, and
with not inconsiderable power and resources. If the price of liberty
is eternal vigilance, we can thank Black for making our task simpler,
by betraying their existence to us, his opponents, that we may better
combat their beliefs.
What then is the best way to combat Black and his ilk? Patient but
entertaining rebuttal. Ridicule and sarcasm. There have been some
excellent examples recently, such as constructing an even more absurd
conspiracy theory to show Black to be an agent of the KGB. Don't feel
obligated to respond to a whole note: he doesn't do us any such courtesy.
instead, if you think of a stinging rebuttal to one point, share it with
us. Point out that it is just one of a morass of lies, propaganda,
and fallacies. His long postings with 80 zillion pseudo-facts are
a typical method of intimidation: ignore it and feel confident to
destroy just the ones you feel sure of. (I am reminded of the tale of
the physicist who confessed to an archaeologist that while Velikovski's
physics was BS, he was quickly would they pick up on the fact they were not the original?
You could back yourself up every night, that way if you were killed you
would only miss the day on which you died. Of course, *you* died, but you_1
could still live on. I suspect they would demand that the president do this,
plus other irreplacables. It would not stop the pres from being assasinated
but it would prevent him from being dead too long.
John F Kennedy could still be alive. What would Jackie think of the new John?
After all she saw him die, but then the new one is essentially the man she woke
up with the day he died.
What if there are a bunch of you walking around? How do you identify the
original? Or do you identify the spawns? Does the original own them, or are
they free? Free I suppose, although if they were owned the owning process
could terminate them. And what if they spawned themselves. Imagine an army
that all thought the same way.
Of course, this negates the prime reason that people live, so that they can
die, hopefully having passed on their knowledge and genetic info to their
children and allowing them to continue. It would be very selfish of a person
to keep replicating himself in an already over populated world. And who would
decide who got to live again? Popular vote? Elvis Lives?
The point I'm trying to make, I guess, is that cheating death may be fun, but
it's not a really sensible long term solution to life. After all, you still
have to die, each and every replication. Why put yourself through that pain
again {, and again}?
Jon Pughklr@hadron.UUCP (Kurt L. Reisler) (09/25/85)
Along the same line, there was a story that appeared in _OMNI_ several years ago. It involved a time in the "future" when the Soviets had taken over the US, in a non-violent coup. They were punishing one of the Democratic Revolutionaries by repeatedly killing him, while transferring his "personality" and memories to a clone, up to the moment of death. The metods of execution that were used were chosen for the psychological horror, such as being fed slowly into an incinerator, feet first. Each clone remembered the previous "original's" death, and was usually forced to go clean it up and bury it. All this, just to change a persons way of thinking? I have forgotten what the point of all this was. Oh well.
cw@madvax.UUCP (Carl Weidling) (09/27/85)
> From: "pugh jon%e.mfenet"@LLL-MFE.ARPA > > > assume it works on life though. Creatures notice no ill effects and people > feel continuous through the process. > > What we have here is a way of spawning processes... > this template will feel like they are the original, except that they should > know they are copies from a discontinuity in the surroundings. There is > ... > I wonder about their first words. Would they all say the same thing after > walking out of the machine? Would it be the same thing the original said? > How quickly would they pick up on the fact they were not the original? > > What if there are a bunch of you walking around? How do you identify the > original?... > decide who got to live again? Popular vote? Elvis Lives? > > The point I'm trying to make, I guess, is that cheating death may be fun, but > it's not a really sensible long term solution to life. After all, you still > have to die, each and every replication. Why put yourself through that pain > again {, and again}? > > Jon Pugh A science fiction novel that explores some of these ideas has the misleading title "Rogue Moon". It is by Alfred Bester. A man is run through a machine that sends all the info on him to a station on the moon. Two copies of him now exist, one on earth, one on the moon, tapes can also be made. For awhile the two copies are in telepathic content. The people want to keep them in telepathic content as long as possible because the moon copy is figuring out a deadly maze and constantly getting killed, but all his experiences, including his death, are experienced and remembered by the earthly copy. An interesting story by Clifford Simak, concerns a double created to perform a deadly mission. The double doesn't know it's a double and is supposed to be rubbed out when the job is done. Simak has said that this is the most vicious story he ever wrote, and that it is no wonder it is the only one ever put on television. It was done in an "Outer Limits" episode. Regards, Carl Weidling
davidl@teklds.UUCP (David Levine) (09/30/85)
In article <22@hadron.UUCP> klr@hadron.UUCP (Kurt L. Reisler) writes
about a story in which a revolutionary was tortured by being repeatedly
killed, then restored as a clone. This puts me in mind of "Rogue Moon"
by Algis Budrys (more famous these days as a reviewer than as a
writer). I think that "Rogue Moon" is relevant to the topic, but
because it is relatively obscure and hard to find, I'll post here some
of its important concepts (hopefully, not enough to make this article a
spoiler).
In this book, an alien base is discovered on the Moon at about the same
time that matter transmission is becoming feasible. The alien base
kills anyone who walks into it if they violate certain obscure and
incomprehensible rules. For example, it's certain death to write the
word "yes" with either hand, but you can write "no". Nobody has been
able to survive for more than a few minutes inside.
As it happens, the matter-transmission process works by making a copy
of the thing being transmitted. If a person is transmitted, the
thought processes of the original and duplicate are identical for the
first ~30 minutes, allowing instantaneous telepathy (even over
interplanetary distances) between the two for this initial period.
After that, the two start becoming different enough that telepathy is
impossible. Naturally, someone tries sending a copy of an intrepid
adventurer into the deadly base. Unfortunately, being in telepathic
contact with the duplicate when he dies drives the adventurer insane.
Enter the protagonist of the story, a professional death-defier. This
man (whose name I forget) is a race-car driver, high-diver, stunt man,
and general lunatic who doesn't mind the thought of death. He is brought
into the project because the head of the project thinks (correctly) that he
might be able to stand being in telepathic contact with a copy while the
copy dies. The bulk of the book details his relationship with the head
of the project as he attempts to penetrate the alien artifact, "dying"
several times a day.
This is one book in which the main character dies in chapter 2, and
dies several hundred times more in the course of the story. The real
subject of the story is how a man deals with death, brought into focus
by that death being his own. I found it fascinating, although it might
not be for you (even if you can find a copy). Like much of Budrys'
fiction, "Rogue Moon" is darkly introspective and gripping on a
psychological level, dealing with the concept of identity. Three stars
(out of five).
David D. Levine (...decvax!tektronix!teklds!davidl) [UUCP]
(teklds!davidl.tektronix@csnet-relay) [ARPA/CSNET]mikel@codas.UUCP (Mikel Manitius) (10/06/85)
> > From: "pugh jon%e.mfenet"@LLL-MFE.ARPA > > > > > > assume it works on life though. Creatures notice no ill effects and people > > feel continuous through the process. > > > > What we have here is a way of spawning processes... > > this template will feel like they are the original, except that they should > > know they are copies from a discontinuity in the surroundings. There is > > ... > > I wonder about their first words. Would they all say the same thing after > > walking out of the machine? Would it be the same thing the original said? > > How quickly would they pick up on the fact they were not the original? > > > > What if there are a bunch of you walking around? How do you identify the > > original?... > > decide who got to live again? Popular vote? Elvis Lives? > > > > The point I'm trying to make, I guess, is that cheating death may be fun, but Actually, if the machine is perfect (which in itself is another problem...), then they are all the originals, if they are trully atomically identical, they will probably all be thinking and doing the same things. Although, I have an idea that what you do is much influenced by your enviornment, and time itself. Therefore, since more than one copy of the human, cannot occupy the same space at the same time, I would venture to say that they could not think the same thing at the same time (with the possible exceptions), however, their thought patterns wwould be identical, and if one did something for a reason, you could be sure that the other would do the same. This would probably change as each copy had it's own experiences and developed a different character. I also think that each copy would perceive itself as the original, imagine yourself, how do you know that you are not a copy of yourself? Weather or not they could understand that they are copies, would depend on the intelegence of the original to begin with. human() { for(;;) fork(); } -- ======= Mikel Manitius ==----===== AT&T (305) 869-2462 RNX: 755 ==------===== Information Systems ...{akguc|ihnp4}!codas!mikel ===----====== SDSS Regional Support ...attmail!mmanitius =========== Altamonte Springs, FL My opinions are my own. =======