Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Teleportation — Fact and Fiction

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 6 years ago | from the there-and-back-again dept.

348

jcatcw writes "Earlier this week actor Hayden Christensen, of Star Wars fame, and director Doug Liman discussed teleportation with MIT professors to compare the reality to the special effects version in the upcoming movie, Jumper. Edward Farhi, director of the Center for Theoretical Physics at MIT, said, 'It's a little less exotic than what you see in the movie. Teleportation has been done, moving a single proton over two miles. [But] teleporting a person? That is pretty far down the line. The quantum state of a living creature is pretty formidable. That is just not in the foreseeable future.'"

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Shock (0, Flamebait)

Bongfish (545460) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103778)

This article is a complete waste of time.

Re:Shock (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22103790)

I think you mean space.

Re:Shock (1)

Laebshade (643478) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103792)

So is reading your comment.

And so is reading this one.

wouldn't in animate objects be easier then? (1, Interesting)

Some_Llama (763766) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103802)

if you could get a computation to figure out the mass and molecular composition of an object, disassembly of the mass>turn into energy>transmit energy>translate into mass>re-assemble.

Theoretically it should be doable although highly intensive energy wise (not worth it). BUT i would think at that point it would just be easier (and possible) to create the object from stored mass by just using a molecular blueprint that could be transmitted. (replicators?)

Re:wouldn't in animate objects be easier then? (1)

calebt3 (1098475) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103898)

(replicators?)
Star Trek or Stargate?
Jokes aside, in the mythology of Star Trek, weren't transporter originally (pre-TOS) pad-to-pad only?

Re:wouldn't in animate objects be easier then? (1)

petermgreen (876956) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104228)

Well in enterprise they certainly had pad to site and site to pad, i'm not sure when site to site transport came in.

Re:wouldn't in animate objects be easier then? (1)

Alaria Phrozen (975601) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104344)

Hello there. I think you've forgotten that when you can go from A->B and from B->C it's almost like you can go from A->C! Transitivity... that's a funny word, it sounds like you're going somewhere. I really liked Enterprise because the tractor beam was a grappling hook. It's just so dirty! I love it. Too bad there were nipples in that first episode. Nipples ruin everything.

More on topic, from all the work that's being done and with the scanning technology required, I think it would be easier to just upload a person's consciousness into machines and transmit them that way. Once we have live biological transportation, do we even need all the meat anyway?

Re:wouldn't in animate objects be easier then? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22104430)

No disassemble!

And we care why? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22103804)

Well, step aside my friend
I've been doing it for years
I say, sit on down, open your eyes
And open up your ears

Say
Put a tree in your butt
Put a bumblebee in your butt
Put a clock in your butt
Put a big rock in your butt
Put some fleas in your butt
Start to sneeze in your butt
Put a tin can in your butt
Put a little tiny man in your butt
Put a light in your butt
Make it bright in your butt
Put a TV in your butt
Put me in your butt
Everybody say

I, hey, that's, man, I ain't putting no trees in nobody's butt,
no bees in nobody's butt, putting nothing--
You must be out your mind, man,
y'all get paid for doing this?
Cause y'all gotta get some kind of money
Cause this don't sound like the kind of--
I'd rather golf, to be perfectly honest,
than put somethin in somebody's butt
to be truthful

Well step aside my friend and let me
show you how you do it
When big bad E just rock rock to it

Put a metal case in your butt
Put her face in your butt
Put a frown in your butt
Put a clown in your butt
Sit on down in your butt
Put a boat in your butt
Put a moat in your butt
Put a mink coat in your butt
Put everything in your butt
Just start to sing about your butt
Feels real good.

Re:And we care why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22104340)

My now, aren't you very creative?

Heisenberg Compensators! Duh! (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22103810)

Obviously this guy didn't read enough Star Trek technical manuals.

Death and Rebirth (5, Interesting)

Sangui (1128165) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103812)

Whenever I see discussion about teleportation discussed, I think about Ilium and how in reality when they were teleporting, they were being killed and brought back to life at the other end, they were never the same person, made of the same atoms, just an exact copy.

Re:Death and Rebirth (1)

zaax (637433) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103840)

Is that a soul?
I think you need to talk to a person of the cloth

Re:Death and Rebirth (5, Interesting)

Tangent128 (1112197) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103920)

Good (if creepy) exploration here: To Be [youtube.com] .

Re:Death and Rebirth (1)

khallow (566160) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104062)

Sounds like one of the weaker Dan Simmons novels. After all, we don't stay the same person. Most of our matter gets flushed out over a few years (as I understand it). And it's obvious that we change substantially over the years in other ways. I still teleportation as less of a change than living ten years.

Re:Death and Rebirth (3, Interesting)

v1 (525388) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104316)

The part that would worry me is the consciousness. Brings up questions like what happens when you die. Does your consciousness cease to exist? probably. So if they replicate you to teleport you, haven't they created a new (but identical at that moment) copy, and then destroy your consciousness? Would your new copy of your consciousness know anything had happened? unlikely.

If sometime in the future teleportation becomes possible, eventually everyone will be using it. By the time a child is old enough to ponder the above, they will have been teleported hundreds of times. At which point either you don't care anymore, or you don't believe your consciousness is destroyed by the teleportation. (since it would not be evident to the latest copy of you) Then you start getting into weirder things, like if someone teleports you, who has never been teleported before, against your will, could they be charged with murder? It's kinda absurd to think your consciousness somehow transfers with the teleportation.

I think this would escalate to a whole new level if you teleported someone and failed to erase the original, and the two got together and were told to argue it out who needs to live and who needs to die. They'd both have the same conscious train of thought and would probably both want to live and would both believe they were "the real one" etc.

Re:Death and Rebirth (5, Interesting)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104476)

I think this would escalate to a whole new level if you teleported someone and failed to erase the original, and the two got together and were told to argue it out who needs to live and who needs to die. They'd both have the same conscious train of thought and would probably both want to live and would both believe they were "the real one" etc.

There was an episode of ST:TNG which dealt with that idea, when a transporter beam was deflected by the oddball atmospherics of a hostile planet and the Riker who was beaming up got doubled ... one made it back to the ship, the other ended up trapped on an abandoned research base for ten years until he was rescued by Enterprise. The one that got out was the one that we all came to know, and the dupe started out identical but evolved emotionally in a different way. It was kind of a cool episode, actually.

Re:Death and Rebirth (1)

scottrocket (1065416) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104736)

It's kinda absurd to think your consciousness somehow transfers with the teleportation.

It's all perspective - I would like to think that my consciousness would be parsed into its' most basic "grammar" (the atoms, or subatomic particles, or...?), & the instructions needed for reconstruction would be included (hopefully!). In Star Trek, I think they "phased" your particles into something like subspace. Either way,in effect my consciousness would be teleported, if only in pieces, awaiting re-assembly. In any event, as long as "I" materialize with all of "my" thoughts & cognitive skills intact, "I" will be happy, or at least not unhappy. In short: I think, therefore me am.

Does it matter that you "die"? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22104086)

But does that really matter? Your atoms are being replaced all the time, just small bits at a time. Scanning and sending data, instead of the actual matter or energy, seems much more plausible. You aren't your atoms, you are the information that your current atomic configuration describes. Have any scars? That scar likely doesn't have a single atom that it did at the time of your injury. It's been copied, bit by bit, atom by atom, over and over again. Teleportation differs only in that it does a whole lot of atom swapping all at once. If the information is beamed correctly, "you" will "arrive" properly.

Normal notions of being, self, life and death don't really apply, at least, most of what people think of doesn't apply and if you break it down, it usually comes down to religious questions, like the soul. If you believe that your body requires a supernatural soul to animate it with intelligence and desires, than teleporation likely isn't for you. If you believe that you are essentially a matrix of interacting atoms, a materialist in other words, than it shouldn't bother you.

Re:Death and Rebirth (2, Insightful)

Artraze (600366) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104246)

While the concept of replication as a method of teleportation is interesting philosophically, it doesn't really solve the major issue:

> The quantum state of a living creature is pretty formidable.

That's really the difficulty: reading and writing all the states of all the atoms/particles with enough accuracy to keep something alive is quite likely impossible. I would say the best (most likely possible) method of teleportation would be more like warping space so that something ends up in a different location without actually moving.

Re:Death and Rebirth... Thinking wrong use here... (3, Interesting)

davidsyes (765062) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104446)

I will venture to say the governments would be all to happy to have precision site-to-SOME/ANY-site lock-on capability. They'd rather snatch and destroy living targets than spend the effort to insert humans to do the snatching. Why lose expendable assets (human, allied/aligned soldiers) when taking out the enemy (or enema) means only needing to lock on and scramble?

With a weaponization of such quantum technology, simple bombs or surveillance devices could also be inserted, with quantum self-destruct structures that respond to counter-intel sweeps, or simply devolve/vaporize when the temperature reaches some design-imposed level. This could be to act as a weapon, or to enhance "plausible deniability".

Worse, as a weapon of torture for those who are maniacs or pranksters who get their hands on one, we (or the future people) might read about rulers, bolts, rocks, and other foreign matter being precision-beamed/teleported into people, animals, or even into security or safety glass in buildings.

Imagine this as the perfect bomb: taking OUT or comproMISING structural members of any building, fortification, dam, tower, transmission/reception site, etc. If used on skyscrapers, the toll worldwide would be, well, ummm, "mind-bending". Who the hell would want to go to work in Chrysler Building, or Petronas or Taipei 101 KNOWING that whole floors are collapsing in for no outward (visible/believable) reason. Oh, the reason would definitely be from outside (assuming the teleporter is not transported into the building...)

And, no, I didn't read this in any books. I've been for decades wondering why in Star Trek we've NEVER seen the Federation or non-Fed use of the teleportation technology to undermine the target ships. Always (with exception of I think one Voyager episode) using phasers, quantum or older torpedoes, outright bombs, etc. The transporter was always used as a utility insertion/extraction/rescue/logistics device, not as a weapon. Had I had one, and had enemies who could not localize me, I'd certainly consider using such as device. But, I'm not a time traveler, don't have enemies (that I know of) who'd want me dead RIGHT NOW, and I (right now) deem certain acts as crossing the line. Even going after certain presidents would not be worth it. Too many unforeseeable consequences might unfold. I wouldn't want to be personally responsible for it (unless I could see into the future and KNEW that I'd be saving more innocent lives (not innocent by or for government reasons, but by higher truths and most politicians would care to believe) than harming.

Hopefully, teleportation technology continues to elude physicists. And, don't tell me about all the "good" things it could do. For one, the things might consume enormous amounts of energy. If they do, then that energy could be harnessed instead for removing a lot of pain, suffering, starvation, hunger and joblessness. But military and government bean counters and strategists all have agendas. Basically, if I'd stumbled upon teleportation tech, I'd probably destroy it and hope it was the ONLY copy. So, better hope I'M not the one some alien encounters. No one government can be trusted with such technology. Not at THIS point in our evolution. Hell, not even 2 or 5 or 25 governments. NON can be trusted.

Nuff said?

Re:Death and Rebirth... Thinking wrong use here... (1)

davidsyes (765062) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104478)

Oh, I forgot: In Star Trek the tractor beams and deflector grids have been used to entrap or destabilize targets, but the crew never used them in a Dr. Evil or maniacal, gleeful way...

Re:Death and Rebirth... Thinking wrong use here... (-1, Troll)

davidsyes (765062) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104514)

OK, I've got karma to burn! Not ONE goddamn minute my post is up, and some close-minded, stickler-for-being-on-topic BASTARD mods me "off-topic". Get a CLUE you cretin. Teleportation topic discussion is NOT just for finger-twiddling geeks or on-topic-Nazis, you twit. Why don't you open your mind? If this had been a discussion of a new kind of nuke discovery by a relative of Einstein or Fermi or others, moral and ethical questioning would SURELY pop upon Slashdot, and all KINDS of people would get mods other than "off-topic".

Jeez. YOU seem like a teleporation-scrambling target. Why don't you let 50 or 150 people weigh in?

Not offtopic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22104582)

How is this offtopic? Topic of the post = teleportation. Topic of the article = teleportation.

Re:Death and Rebirth... Thinking wrong use here... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22104758)

Whoever modded this OT is a moron. Is the post not about the possible uses of teleportation? Is the summary and TFA not about teleporation? Then why is the post Off Topic.

It's a shame that no punishment is doled out during metamoderation!

Re:Death and Rebirth (1)

BootNinja (743040) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104352)

But you see, every cell in your body is replaced every seven years, so you aren't that exact set of cells. I find it far more feasible to say that what I am is a specific configuration of cells with specific quantum signatures. Therefore if the copy that is created on the far end of the transport has an identical quantum signature to the original you could say that the copy has an identity with the original.

Re:Death and Rebirth (1)

Dahamma (304068) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104708)

But you see, every cell in your body is replaced every seven years, so you aren't that exact set of cells.

Poetic, but inaccurate. With a few exceptions, almost all nerve cells do not get replaced over your entire lifespan. And in the end, those are the cells that define your personality, which is what you would call an "identity".

I actually agree with the idea that if one could replicate the exact quantum state of every particle in your body, then there is no difference from the original. But everything you said to get to that point is fairly ridiculous, and sounds more like a Star Trek episode than science...

Re:Death and Rebirth (1)

TheLazySci-FiAuthor (1089561) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104408)

If the only thing which distinguishes one particle or system from the next is its state, then identical states cannot be considered separate or different.

Teleportation does not seem to be about matter but about state. I feel this may be thought-evidence for consciousness continuity or some kind of existence fidelity (if one considers consciousness as something describable by quantum physics).

One day perhaps teleportation will be viewed as we see flight today: simple fundamentals and devilish engineering.

Re:Death and Rebirth (1)

ILuvRamen (1026668) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104488)

that method is the hardest when you think about it. I actually did think about it during Voyager :D Bending space or using quantum effects is the easiest but having a computer scan every atom and its vector (which direction it's moving and how "hard" would be important) and storing that all then being able to transmit it to another computer and re-assemble it all together and start all the atoms moving at the same vectors is just as hard as it sounds. Plus then we could probably make copies of ourselves with that technology and that'd be TEH COOLNESS for open source projects so finally I wouldn't have to work with lazy and crazy people or 16 year olds lol. And then we could clone the president and put him in stasis in case he gets assassinated! Lotsa possibilities there. But yeah, I don't think anyone should ever pursue that technique cuz it's just too hard and dangerous no matter what your level of technology.

Re:Death and Rebirth (1)

deanoaz (843940) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104502)

I've always thought, from the first time I saw it on Star Trek or read about it in a Sci-Fi story, that teleportation is obviously a quick painless death followed by replacement of you with a new synthetic person who thinks they are you. I'll pass.

Re:Death and Rebirth (1)

Hunter-Killer (144296) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104652)

The fate of souls during teleportation was an issue discussed by the religious faction of Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri:

And what of the immortal soul in such transactions? Can this machine transmit and reattach it as well? Or is it lost forever, leaving a soulless body to wander the world in despair?

Sister Miriam Godwinson
"We Must Dissent"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wh-ZcdO5fe8 [youtube.com]

SMAC is one of the most philosophical games, and a classic.

Re:Death and Rebirth (1)

Rogerborg (306625) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104672)

Are you made of the same atoms from one instant to another?

How would you test it?

so it's a fax machine? (1)

commodoresloat (172735) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104766)

So basically what they're doing is send a FAX of the particles at one end to the other? And since the person on one end "dies" in order to send their particles to the other end, this is basically a Snuff FAX?

On the theory... (2)

dada21 (163177) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103816)

...I actually dreamed about teleportation theory a few weeks ago. That's odd that this comes up.

I woke up to thinking about it. If you teleport a la Star Trek, you're probably going to die just because pieces of your organs are seperated. Maybe if you could be placed in a true time-temporal state, it might work in chunks.

I'd guess the best way to teleport would be to map your atomic structure, and use some sort of carbon/hydrogen/oxygen builder to rebuild you piece by piece exactly using the atoms at the other end. Impossible today, yes. Probably a bit too scary for things living.

The thoughts moved to faster-than-light travel, and the same problems came up. If you could accelerate to "warp speed", would all your atoms accelerate at the same time or would you be stretched to oblivion?

Re:On the theory... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22103922)

People will have to come to terms with potential undesirable outcomes with teleportation. Take for example the short story Think Like a Dinosaur.
An individual is put into the teleportation chamber, data regarding their pattern is streamed at superluminal speeds to the destination where the individual is reconstructed while the original is destroyed.
The copy thinks and believes to be the original self as much as the original. There is no interruption of consciousness. If the original isn't destroyed due to a glitch does the original have the same rights or should everyone eventually become omnipresent and never return to their point of origin?

You have got to be kidding me (5, Funny)

handelaar (65505) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103820)

"Next week, we'll be discussing the differences between general and special relativity with Big Bird from Sesame Street."

Re:You have got to be kidding me (1)

xannash (861526) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103876)

And will you be leading that discussion?

Re:You have got to be kidding me (5, Funny)

Malevolent Tester (1201209) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103884)

Today, we'll be looking at the letter c

e=mc^2 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22104486)

Come on, if you're going to go there, you can at least try.

"Brought to you today by the letters e, m, and by the number c."

Distance? (2, Interesting)

calebt3 (1098475) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103848)

How much does distance affect this? Is two miles near the theoretical limit something can be teleported before degradation sets in? Or is that just how far the scientists have bothered to try at this point?

Re:Distance? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22103954)

Distance isn't an issue as far as its being possible with quantum teleportation.

Teleportation Fraud (4, Informative)

camperdave (969942) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104150)

Science hasn't teleported squat. They've just caused one particle to mimic the quantum state of another. The number of particles at the source hasn't changed. The number of particles at the destination hasn't changed. So in what way was anything "teleported"?

Re:Teleportation Fraud (3, Insightful)

AsnFkr (545033) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104232)

Sounds more like they sent a fax.

Re:Teleportation Fraud (1)

davidsyes (765062) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104532)

LOOKS like they sent a fax. Just the facts, ma'am...

But seriously, with a fax, there's a communications line that can be disrupted. Can a quantum teleportation "instruction" to "state-mimic" be disrupted? (I don't know, and that's why I'm asking")...

Re:Teleportation Fraud (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22104724)

Yes, but it was a SUBATOMIC fax! Viva la science!

Re:Teleportation Fraud (1)

CastrTroy (595695) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104252)

So basically if they were able to do the same thing with people, they would just be creating and exact duplicate of the person. Now that could be useful.

Re:Teleportation Fraud (1)

smorken (990019) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104428)

certainly, imagine a beowulf cluster of Natalie Portmans!

Re:Teleportation Fraud (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22104494)

Versus Lucy Liu Mob #579

Re:Teleportation Fraud (1)

Adambomb (118938) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104538)

Now, 0 time to target communication of information WOULD be interesting. Do you have any sources concerning the quanntum state teleportation that mention if there was a time lapse at all?

Certainly not teleporting matter in the any sense, but that would still be more than squat.

Re:Teleportation Fraud (2, Informative)

MisterCaptainFunKill (1181071) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104680)

Science hasn't teleported squat. They've just caused one particle to mimic the quantum state of another. The number of particles at the source hasn't changed. The number of particles at the destination hasn't changed. So in what way was anything "teleported"?
The "teleported" part is in that the particles were entangled. So, while they didn't actually move the particle, they "teleported" the properties of one atom onto another at a distance. It's the same as teleportation in that sense, but there are things we call conservation laws that prevent what you're talking about with literally teleporting matter as in moving it somewhere else instantly without it crossing the space between (or falling into a wormhole).

Re:Teleportation Fraud (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22104756)

Why would teleportation require the destruction of the original?
In case of, say, Star Trek, the original person was destroyed
simply because the actors had their copy-once bits set.

Fixed that for you. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22103860)

Earlier this week "actor" Hayden Christensen...

Re:Fixed that for you. (0, Offtopic)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104516)

Yeah, I pretty much lost any vestigial respect I had for George Lucas when I found out he cast Christensen as Annakin Skywalker. Not that that has anything to do with teleportation, other than I can think of a few places I'd like to beam Lucas to.

disassembly never made sense (3, Interesting)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103870)

The Star Trek method never made any sense, chopping up a living organism and beaming it defies even scifi logic. It makes more sense to just say it's a wormhole between here and there.

Re:disassembly never made sense (4, Informative)

Quarters (18322) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103924)

The Star Trek method makes perfect sense. Roddenberry & Co. didn't have the budget for establishing shots with shuttle craft and planetary atmospheric flight. They needed something that would be cheap to produce, not eat up lots of show time, and would have a good "wow" factor.

Re:disassembly never made sense (1)

calebt3 (1098475) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103984)

Roddenberry & Co. didn't have the budget for establishing shots with shuttle craft and planetary atmospheric flight.
They could have done something like the Stargate, except with controlled exit points rather than only to other gates.

Re:disassembly never made sense (1)

VValdo (10446) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104100)

They could have done something like the Stargate, except with controlled exit points rather than only to other gates.

GlaDOS wouldn't let them.

More ontopic, congrats to Doug Liman on his deal with the WGA [wga.org] .

W

(the pastry is a mistruth?)

The old poem (5, Funny)

Chairboy (88841) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103896)

"I teleported home one night
with Ron & Sid & Meg
Ron stole Megan's heart away
and I got Sydney's leg."

- Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Where's Wesley Crusher to help them out? (-1, Offtopic)

MagikSlinger (259969) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103944)

He'd make it from his old science projects and make it work better than the Enterprise's transporters! :-P

(Too bad one can't actually invoke CleverNickName to post)

Re:Where's Wesley Crusher to help them out? (0, Offtopic)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104572)

Yeah, but it would take over the Enterprise's main computer and force Data to reset himself, with a chastened Wesley ending up being chewed out by Georgi after it's all over, having overlooked the fact that he had accidentally bypassed the matter-antimatter intermix safety protocols and almost blown up the ship.

Wesley Crusher was one of the most annoying and dangerously brilliant Star Trek characters ever. I was soooo glad when he bombed out of Starfleet Academy and went away with the Traveller and we never had to see him again.

Shouldn't that be... (5, Insightful)

kbob88 (951258) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103948)

"Earlier this week actor Hayden Christensen, of Star Wars fame,


"Earlier this week actor Hayden Christensen, of Star Wars infamy..."

There, fixed that for you.

Re:Shouldn't that be... (2, Funny)

Swampash (1131503) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104280)

Nah, I liked Christensen in SW2 and 3. I thought he did pretty well with the script and direction he had... WHICH WAS AN ABOMINATION BEFORE GOD.

How about recreation? (4, Interesting)

RyanFenton (230700) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103956)

If full-on analog teleportation using raw physics isn't possible in the short-to-mid term, what about recreation of a person at the endpoint?

What I mean by that, is you are able to identify what in a person's brain (and related nervous systems) that allows them to be their own unique person, and can store that as some kind of information, if that can be sent to a far-off location, to a reusable body or synthetic equivalent. This body could then perform the same role that the original would. You could afterwards read what changed in the meantime to find out what happened.

Of course, like all teleportation/copying ideas, it would challenge our definitions of what makes any of us unique, and the underlying nature of our definition of self.

Ryan Fenton

Re:How about recreation? (1)

RyanFenton (230700) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103988)

Drat - should have added a dash between re- and creation, otherwise it looks like a word for relaxation (which itself looks like a rather funny word in that context). Darn you again, written english!

Ryan Fenton

Re:How about recreation? (1)

fullgandoo (1188759) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104256)

That's all fine but what to do with the original? Does the original continue to exist or is killed -9? If it exists, how would you synchronize the two? What happens to the copy? What if the copy doesn't want to be erased? It is these ethical dilemmas that are keeping telportation from becoming a reality!

Re:How about recreation? (1)

dkone (457398) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104524)

Ahh, but the problem Ryan, is that I have a patent on that idea already and you are in violation of *IAA, DCMA, copyright violation, IP transgressions and various other egregious and flagrant affronts to my idea.

Just think of all the patent lawsuits that will crawl from beneath the rocks when some does come up with a way to successfully teleport.

DK

Chop chop (1)

cefek (148764) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103960)

Make a set of protons of myself and then teleport me, one proton at a time, to that chick next door I've been dying to meet. Is that too much to ask?

Re:Chop chop (1)

calebt3 (1098475) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104024)

These are geeks too. So it is too much to ask them to talk to a pretty girl in order to get her permission to set up the receiving equipment.

An information universe (1)

FromTheAir (938543) | more than 6 years ago | (#22103978)

If it's an information universe then prehaps it is possible and information technology may give us more insight into the universe than we think. Being that all you are reading now is the result of two values 0 and 1. There are two things that have not been understood yet. That quantum randomness is all pervading and that consciousness / observer [virtual particles] give rise to form via a filtering mechanism which is also the same as projection. Quantum randomness is the field. In other words from the entropy of the universe comes order as a function of consciousness. The other thing that has yet to be understood is that space connects everything. Action at a distance is possible because the two objects are connected by the very same space. If I have a long stick and you hold the other end of it and I thrust my end towards you, you will instantly faster than the speed of light feel it at your end. Now replace the stick with space. Travel across the universe is possible because travel is a function of space not matter and with that you can understand the gravity of the situation. Travel is only an appearance a valid one at that, creating a real experience, it's all about choice of perception. You can fantasize all you want and believe or fictionalize, but if the math doesn't work, it is not going to become reality.

Re:An information universe (5, Informative)

acid_andy (534219) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104126)

If I have a long stick and you hold the other end of it and I thrust my end towards you, you will instantly faster than the speed of light feel it at your end.

Although it's a neat idea as a thought experiment with an infinitely rigid stick, in reality the effect cannot be faster than the speed of light as the force you apply accerlerates the molecules at the end closest to your hand first, which in turn apply an increased force against the next molecules along and so on until the force has propogated through the whole stick to the other end. As it's essentially forces accelerating masses, they must still obey special relativity and cannot move faster than the speed of light in a vacuum.

Re:An information universe (4, Informative)

AJWM (19027) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104278)

You're exactly right. In fact, the impulse is transmitted at the speed of sound in the stick.

Re:An information universe (1)

DemonThing (745994) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104288)

In fact it wouldn't be anywhere near the speed of light; assuming you're not pushing too hard, the effect will only propagate at the speed of sound of the material of the stick. (For instance, steel is roughly 5 km/s, which is about 0.0017% the speed of light)

Re:An information universe (1)

FromTheAir (938543) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104584)

Yes, you are technically correct about the stick. It was meant to convey an idea. As an object approaches the speed of light,it's mass approaches infinity. So reach the speed of light it would need to cease to have mass becoming pure information.

Re:An information universe (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22104176)

"you will instantly faster than the speed of light feel it at your end"

No you don't. You feel it far far slower than the speed of light. In fact the transfer of your energy on one end of the stick to fully traverse the stick in question doesn't even travel faster than light. Far slower.

Quantum Information (2, Informative)

ilikepi314 (1217898) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104014)

The article doesn't go much into it, but I once saw and spoke with one of the leading researchers into quantum information theory. He gave a fantastic seminar on how to send "instant signals". This is my poor memory trying to recall things over my head, so please correct me if I make a mistake, but I think this is the general principle:

You need quantum entangled particles so that their states are always related, and no matter how far apart, when you mess with one particle, the other one instantly changes state accordingly. Thus, you can send signals instantly to anywhere (theoretically) by this approach, manipulating a particle some place and having people elsewhere record the changes from its entangled twin.

The problem is that while its instant when you decide to do it, you first have to get half of the entangled particles to their destination (moon base or whatever) -- so it would be days, months or years until you transported the entangled particles elsewhere, and ONLY THEN could you actually instantly send signals to the moon, Pluto, etc.

It seems teleportation would have a similar constraint, based on the article. This isn't to say teleportation or instant communication is never going to work, but just that infrastructure would need to be well thought-out in advance, and that it isn't quite the "go anywhere, even if you haven't been there before" of sci-fi.

Actually, it's not that hard (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22104032)

On my planet, we figured it out about 8 Earth years after we reached the point where you are. That's how I got here.

oooh, not quite. (0, Redundant)

quest(answer)ion (894426) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104042)

errors in TFA:

Christensen, who gained infamy and complete pariah status playing Anakin Skywalker in Star Wars Episodes II and III
there. fixed.

Bose-Einstein Condensate. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22104064)

Too lazy to log in.

Quantum entanglement is a problem, but working with a bose-einstein condensate might get around the problem.

Check it here [newscientist.com] . Some Australian scientists are playing around with it.

Star Wars? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22104068)

From TFA: "...who gained fame and heart-throb status playing Anakin Skywalker in Star Wars Episodes II and II..."

Well, I chuckled, at least.

Everyone exists at coordinates 0,0,0 (1)

FromTheAir (938543) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104090)

That is part of the revelation of Intangics, that there are no particles only the appearance of particles and there is no travel only the appearance of travel. When you drive down the street you are not moving, the world is moving around you.

Which superpower would you want? (1)

Checkered Daemon (20214) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104128)

I found it fascinating that in Roger Zelazny's "Creatures of Light and Darkness", the most powerful being in the universe was a teleportationist. Think about it.

Re:Which superpower would you want? (1)

calebt3 (1098475) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104188)

Have you seen the movie "Next"? Precognition is a pretty good contender.

MY power= Turn anything into CHEESE! (2, Funny)

spineboy (22918) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104360)

Never be hungry. The fastidious would fear being turned into stinky Limberger. Tough guys would have to run or be turned into runny camembert. Bible thumping creationalist would be turned into........American "cheese"

But seriously pre-cog would be cool at first, but might take all the joy out of life - no surprises anymore. Right now my desired powers would be either super-speed like the Flash, or jumping ability like the Hulk. But that could be 'cause I'm living in Los Angeles, where the average traffic speed is 11 MPH (16 KPH).

Re:MY power= Turn anything into CHEESE! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22104564)

11 MPH is 17.6 KPH.

Re:Which superpower would you want? (1)

calebt3 (1098475) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104468)

Never needing sleep is also good.

Re:Which superpower would you want? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22104764)

If the teleporting power comes with some invisibility cloth that will be sweet. Just teleport myself to some hottie dorm and getting there, staying invisible.

Fixed Summary (0, Redundant)

Red Pointy Tail (127601) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104158)

Earlier this week actor Hayden Christensen, of Star Wars infamy, ...
There. Fixed it for you.

Larry Niven's prior art (2, Informative)

KORfan (524397) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104194)

Larry Niven wrote a bit about the problems with teleportation, such as conservation of momentum and energy. You also have to do two-way teleportation, otherwise you're teleporting into matter (that includes air). If you change elevations, what happens to the potential energy? Does it convert to heat?

Re:Larry Niven's prior art (1)

Dan East (318230) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104406)

One of the more likely scenarios would be to have two blobs of matter that consist entirely of entangled pairs. You would transport, via standard means, one blob of matter to one location, and could then modify it by making changes to the first blob (or vice versa I presume).

Dan East

Re:Larry Niven's prior art (3, Interesting)

v1 (525388) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104490)

there are far more serious things to consider, like targetting. If you are strictly talking space, I don't even know if they've managed to figure out how fast Earth is moving through space. That's the big one with time travel too... ok lets say you CAN time travel. You'll do that exactly ONCE. ;) Then you'll suck vacuum for a few minutes. Time travel without teleportation is useless even if possible. For all we know someone's already invented it. Other than "I can make things disappear forever" you'd be hard pressed to prove it.

Post-singularity (2, Interesting)

ecloud (3022) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104218)

I think it will be done after the singularity, after technology has subsumed biological evolution. After that, it will not be so important because virtual reality and actual reality will have merged and people will be able to send themselves (in the form of software) anywhere that the network extends. But if it's possible, it still will remain an interesting academic challenge.

Science aside... (3, Insightful)

januth (1000892) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104382)

It sounds like they combined the pretty decent book by Steven Gould with Highlander 2 and Underworld.

Plot outline from IMDB: "A genetic anomaly allows a young man to teleport himself anywhere. He discovers this gift has existed for centuries and finds himself in a war that has been raging for thousands of years between "Jumpers" and those who have sworn to kill them."

Another Hollywood abortion...

Well, let's take a look at this .. (1)

ScrewMaster (602015) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104416)

There are basically two ways that are traditionally thought of for teleportation:

1. Matter Transmission: analyzing the structure of an object, deconstructing it somehow, and transmitting the (vast amount of) energy and information needed to reconstruct the object to a remote location, with all the possible complications that entails (the beam being intercepted, extra copies being made, the transmission being garbled, etc.) I always hear Dr. McCoy's voice when I think about that, "Hell of a way to travel, spreading a man's molecules all across the galaxy!"

2. Opening a portal in space-time, rubber-sheet Universe-style, and simply stepping through to your destination. No disassembly required.

Personally, I prefer #2. It uncomplicates the structure of the tale.

Very funny, Scotty! (2, Funny)

PPH (736903) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104500)

Now beam down my pants!

Goog name (1)

Vadim Makarov (529622) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104540)

I think everyone in the field agrees that teleportation as the name of the physical effect is just wonderful. The name relates to the modern fairy tales. This, as a consequence, gets people and media talking about it. It excites students, too, which may be no less important.

Compare to how dull it could have been if it were called a "transfer of quantum state" or something like that.

Heisenberg Compensators (4, Informative)

TobyRush (957946) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104548)

I'm just assuming that everyone here knows this already, but for the one or two of you who don't know, the Heisenberg Compensator is the part of the ST transporter that deals with the pesky quantum issue of not being able to pin down the exact location of the subatomic particles whizzing around in Picard's body.

Of course it's physically impossible to make such a compensation, and when one of the technical guys on the show's staff (Okuda?) was asked how the Heisenberg Compensator worked, he replied, "Very well, thank you."

I see dead people! (2, Insightful)

r_jensen11 (598210) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104704)

The quantum state of a living creature is pretty formidable. That is just not in the foreseeable future.
Then let's start with something more simple. Can we expect to teleport dead people in the foreseeable future?

c(o3k (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#22104722)

so that you 3on't DOG THAT IT IS. IT

I'd rather wait... (1)

billybob_jcv (967047) | more than 6 years ago | (#22104726)

...for WonkaVision...
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?