Consciousness transfer.

[Jack427]

I cant answer the op's question as well, but I like to set some basics straight:

- first of all, we are all energy already; so saying that a human conciencse cant exist in form of energy would be factually be wrong.

- Second, computers have data storage systems like FAT, NTFS. So when you would transfer a human conciencse into binary or quantumnary the question would be how the data would be allocated and interconnected. Scientists say the human brain has a storage capacity of about 1 TB that doesnt sound like much. but the question is which data system is it ? if you'ld transfer it 1o1 to a FAT system, the storage needed could be much more. And then the interconnection between the nodes in the brain isnt saved yet. As it seems the brain doesnt work like a computer which has a cpu and a storage system, it seems to work like the interconnection of many small units, which could be all small computers.

- Third: people separate technical and biological too strongly, I think this is a flaw of our limited understanding of the world yet. Factually technical and biological are the same cause the molecules of a computer are the same like the molecules of a person, just in a different allocation.

- And finally: I dont think a person or a soul augumented or transferred onto a computer would be the same. The sole fact of augumentation that comes with this transfer would change the person. And even if you'ld make a 1on1 copy with no augumentation, the sole fact of eternal life or "not growing older" would change the person. And even if you would make the person age, the sole fact of no illnesses no more would change the soul. And if you'ld account for everything you can possibly think of and make a biologically functioning one on one copy of said person, the fact that this person would think of itself as a clone would change the person. The factor of human nature needs to play the integral part in the equation

In that light my answer would be, against all odds: No, a 1on1 copy onto a harddrive of a soul will never be possible.

The third part is your opinion, while they are similar on an atomic level that isn't all that matters. Plus you said " Factually technical and biological are the same cause the molecules of a computer are the same like the molecules of a person, just in a different allocation. " Yes, they are in a different allocation, that is one reason why they are different. Just because they are molecules doesn't make them the same. There are different kinds of molecules.

You are talking about computers of today, we are talking about virtual reality simulations. Just to have a virtual reality simulation capable of human entry you would need much stronger computers.

 

[entropie]

The third part is your opinion, while they are similar on an atomic level that isn't all that matters. Plus you said " Factually technical and biological are the same cause the molecules of a computer are the same like the molecules of a person, just in a different allocation. " Yes, they are in a different allocation, that is one reason why they are different. Just because they are molecules doesn't make them the same. There are different kinds of molecules.

You are talking about computers of today, we are talking about virtual reality simulations. Just to have a virtual reality simulation capable of human entry you would need much stronger computers.

Yea of course it is an opinion but it has a strong point. People separate the technical and the biological and they talk in regards to the biological about a soul, while they dont do that regarding the technical. Why is that cause on the subatomic its all the same. It may consist of different molecules, but as long as the subatomic is the same, I dont see why you cant change the allocation.

I am thinking several steps ahead here. This goes into the direction of manipulating the subatomic and is meant to underline the point of a conciensce existing as pure energy.

If you dont want to go that far yet, a better example would be neural tissue used in computers. When you talk about such things, many people will start to talk about the unethical use of the biological, but fact is its all the same. its all nothing but energy.

the really intresting question is: what is energy ?

 

[Jack427]

Yea of course it is an opinion but it has a strong point. People separate the technical and the biological and they talk in regards to the biological about a soul, while they dont do that regarding the technical. Why is that cause on the subatomic its all the same. It may consist of different molecules, but as long as the subatomic is the same, I dont see why you cant change the allocation.

I am thinking several steps ahead here. This goes into the direction of manipulating the subatomic and is meant to underline the point of a conciensce existing as pure energy.

If you dont want to go that far yet, a better example would be neural tissue used in computers. When you talk about such things, many people will start to talk about the unethical use of the biological, but fact is its all the same. its all nothing but energy.

the really intresting question is: what is energy ?

Everything is the same on a tiny tiny scale. But the big is what matters. Human skin and coal are quite different. If we were to pay such attention to the small like you do, they would be indistinguishable.

" What is energy? " is both a scientific and philosophical question, so that makes it very hard to answer.

 

[redacted]

I cant answer the op's question as well, but I like to set some basics straight:

- first of all, we are all energy already; so saying that a human conciencse cant exist in form of energy would be factually be wrong.

- Second, computers have data storage systems like FAT, NTFS. So when you would transfer a human conciencse into binary or quantumnary the question would be how the data would be allocated and interconnected. Scientists say the human brain has a storage capacity of about 1 TB that doesnt sound like much. but the question is which data system is it ? if you'ld transfer it 1o1 to a FAT system, the storage needed could be much more. And then the interconnection between the nodes in the brain isnt saved yet. As it seems the brain doesnt work like a computer which has a cpu and a storage system, it seems to work like the interconnection of many small units, which could be all small computers.

You have to think of it in terms of functional equivalence -- if you imagine the mind as hundreds of thousands of lines of code, you could instantiate in on any computer... the brain is just a biological one.

You can make a calculator with vacuum tubes, you can make one with computer chips, etc. They're all gonne be calculators and are gonna do the same thing. If the input/output relationships are the same, what's the difference?

I think of consciousness as a specific kind of input/output relationship.

- Third: people separate technical and biological too strongly, I think this is a flaw of our limited understanding of the world yet. Factually technical and biological are the same cause the molecules of a computer are the same like the molecules of a person, just in a different allocation.

- And finally: I dont think a person or a soul augumented or transferred onto a computer would be the same. The sole fact of augumentation that comes with this transfer would change the person. And even if you'ld make a 1on1 copy with no augumentation, the sole fact of eternal life or "not growing older" would change the person. And even if you would make the person age, the sole fact of no illnesses no more would change the soul. And if you'ld account for everything you can possibly think of and make a biologically functioning one on one copy of said person, the fact that this person would think of itself as a clone would change the person. The factor of human nature needs to play the integral part in the equation

In that light my answer would be, against all odds: No, a 1on1 copy onto a harddrive of a soul will never be possible.

But what if you keep more of the input/output relationships? Like, you design a computer with the same senses, the same lag times, the same outside appearance, etc.

I know there'd probably be slight differences (unless you designed some cell decay, a circulatory system, etc. etc. which is just absurd), but if it talks and processes like someone with a soul, wouldn't it have a soul?

 

[funkadelik]

If I could think like I think now, feel like I do now (emotional feeling, not tangible feeling) and function like I do now, I don't see how it would be a problem as far as my identity is concerned.

Life would be very different, obviously, but I would still have the personality and thoughts that define me. However, without the threat of mortality, all of my ambitions might change. My philosophies on life would change. Without physical discomfort and limitation I probably wouldn't appreciate or fear the physical world in the same capacity as I do now, which would probably change my relationships and ability to relate with people.

I would be me, but I would not be human. I would be me, but I would change - organically, though, as anyone placed in a new situation eventually does (the world "adaptation" seems the most appropriate).