Skip to main content

In the Star Trek universe, how do we know that the transporter didn't kill you and create a replicant?



One of the reasons I would personally never get in a transporter is that there is no evidence that the Real Me isn't just vaporized and a Copy Me created at the other location. The Copy Me might have all my memories and be indistinguishable from the original, but it isn't the Real Me.


I know that some early characters (especially in ST:Enterprise) had problems with transporters -- but these mostly seemed to concern safety. No one discussed the metaphysics of the technology.


Was there ever proof -- or even discussion -- of the question of whether the transporter really was transporting, or just creating a heck of a good copy?


Note 1: Yes, the transporter tech in ST sends the 'atoms' as well as the 'bits' to reconstruct the atoms, so it's not quite a 23rd century fax machine. But you're still being vaporized.....


Note 2: And yes, I do wake up each morning wondering if I am the same person who went to sleep the previous night, thank you very much. Why do you ask?



Answer



Yes there is. In STE-Daedalus there is the following dialog with Emory Erickson, the inventor of the transporter:




ARCHER: I have to confess, given a choice, I'd much rather use a good old-fashioned shuttlepod.
EMORY: I'll never forget the protests when the transporter was first approved for bio-matter.
DANICA: Oh, God. Here we go.
EMORY: People said it was unsafe, that it caused brain cancer, psychosis, and even sleep disorders. And then there was all that metaphysical chatter about whether or not the person who arrived after the transport was the same person who left, and not some weird copy.
TUCKER: Which would make all of us copies.
EMORY: I had to fight all of that nonsense, and I'm not going to tell you there weren't costs. I'm living proof of that, but I won. Mankind is better off. Makes everything I've fought for worthwhile.
TUCKER: Here's to a successful experiment.



Obviously Erickson was successful enough to allay the metaphysical fears, since - as we know - most people are comfortable with the transporter.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

story identification - Animation: floating island, flying pests

At least 20 years ago I watched a short animated film which stuck in my mind. The whole thing was wordless, possibly European, and I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine it... It featured a flying island which was inhabited by some creatures who (in my memory) reminded me of the Moomins. The island was frequently bothered by large winged animals who swooped around, although I don't think they did any actual damage. At the end one of the moomin creatures suddenly gets a weird feeling, feels forced to climb to the top of the island and then plunges down a shaft right through the centre - only to emerge at the bottom as one of the flyers. Answer Skywhales from 1983. The story begins with a man warning the tribe of approaching skywhales. The drummers then warn everybody of the hunt as everyone get prepared to set "sail". Except one man is found in his home sleeping as the noise wake him up. He then gets ready and is about to take his weapon as he hesitates then decides ...
Post a Comment
Read more

harry potter - Did Dolores Umbridge Have Any Association with Voldemort (or Death Eaters) before His Return?

I noticed that Dolores Umbridge was born during the first Wizarding War, so it's very likely she wasn't a Death Eater then (but she is pretty evil -- who knows?). After that Voldemort was not around in a way that could affect many people, and most wouldn't know he was planning to rise again. During that time, and up through Voldemort's return (in Goblet of Fire ), did Umbridge have any connection with the Death Eaters or with Voldemort? Was she doing what she did on her own, or was it because of an association with Voldemort or his allies? Answer Dolores Umbridge was definitely not a good person. However, as Sirius points out, "the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters". Remember that he also says that he doesn't believe Umbridge to be a Death Eater, but that she's evil enough (or something like that). I think there are two strong reasons to believe that: Umbridge was proud to do everything according to the law, except when she trie...
Post a Comment
Read more

tolkiens legendarium - Did Gandalf wear his Ring of Power throughout the trilogy?

After Gandalf discovered that Sauron was back and sent Frodo on his quest to Rivendell, did he continue to wear Narya (one of the Three Rings)? It seems like a huge risk to continue to wear it after the Nazgûl (Ringwraiths) started to try and reclaim the One Ring; if they managed to get the ring to Sauron, couldn't he be corrupted by his power? Whatever powers Narya bestows upon him couldn't possibly be worth the huge risk, could it? Answer When Sauron forged the one ring and put it on his finger, the other ring bearers were immediately aware of him and his intentions and removed their own rings. There is no reason why they couldn't merely do so again. As soon as Sauron set the One Ring upon his finger they were aware of him; and they knew him, and preceived that he would be master of them, and of all they wrought. Then in anger and fear they took off their rings. "Of the Rings of Power and the Third Age," Silmarillion
Post a Comment
Read more