From: Harvey Newstrom (mail@HarveyNewstrom.com)
Date: Thu May 31 2001 - 19:19:18 MDT
Brent Allsop wrote,
> "Harvey Newstrom" <mail@HarveyNewstrom.com>,
> I have a question for you.
I have an answer for you. (You go first.)
> I've enjoyed reading your responses to Lee.
Thanks. I enjoy discussing these kinds of questions with intelligent people
who have a different point of view. I seek to understand their view and
hope to be able to articulate my own.
> Let's say this cortex was fed data from another
> person's eyes. Let's say it was grafted into your brain in such a way
> that the other person's spatial awareness from his eyes was projected
> into your conscious visual world. Let's say you then experienced and
> were subjectively aware of both visual views at the same time, within
> the same subjective space or awareness.
Very good example. I would see the world from two different locations at
the same time.
> Now, imagine if it were possible to do this joining such that
> the artificial cortex was a million miles away?
Cool.
> Imagine that this could be achieved with more than just an
> artificial visual cortex, but could be done with, say a twin's or
> copies entire brain. With such, you both would be directly
> subjectively aware of each other in the same conscious awareness. You
> would feel and see everything he knows, and he would know the same as
> you. There would be two representations in this joined subjective
> world, one for you, and one for him, and they would both exist in the
> same consciousness.
Then these two people would be merged into one concept of self. Everything
within both persons would be perceived as "internal self."
> If you happened to be a copy on a ship that was tragically
> about to fall into the sun or something, and this remote conscious
> merge with your twin back on earth, was such that the representation
> of you, your conscious knowledge of yourself, all of it's memories and
> experiences and everything, could transfer over this mind meld link to
> enhabit an expanded conscious world of your twin, would this lesson
> your fear of the eminent death of one of you?
Nope, sorry. This is like watching a fancy TV or holodeck, where I
experience life through the other person. This is exactly what it would
seem like to be that other person. But like a TV, it ends when the show is
over. As soon as the link breaks, I'm still in my original body and not in
the other body.
Imagine that this is just a form of super-TV. I am watching star-trek and
see/feel/experience flying through the cosmos with Mr. Spock. Do I fear
death from the Klingons? No, because it is not real. Do I fear a burglar
breaking into my house while I am watching TV? Yes, because he can kill me.
Even though I am experiencing being far away, my real life is still
dependent on my real body. If it is destroyed, I am dead.
If we could somehow get my consciousness to transfer to the other body such
that the link could be severed with me on the other side instead of
remaining on my side, then I would agree.
Although your example is perfect for making me experience the sensations as
if I transferred, or even fooling me into thinking that I transferred, it is
just an illusion. It lasts only as long as the link stays up and my
original body stays alive. If there is static on the link, I perceive the
distorted picture not the real picture. If the link is time delayed because
of long distances, I experience the sensory input later when the data
reaches my original body; I do not experience it first hand in the far body
at the time it is happening. What I seem to experience is merely a
recording of a far away event being played back. Although it makes me feel
like I am really there, I am not. I don't even know if the place in the
recording still exists or not.
> Of course, this is something like how I think things could
> work, and if it could be done this way, it sure would lesson my fear
> of being "transported", "copied", "uploaded" or whatever.
I would like the link turned off slowly. If I say "wait, I'm losing the
picture!" I know that I am still in the original body viewing the
simulation. If I don't lose the picture while the link is turned down, and
I remain conscious after it is disconnected, and after separation if I find
myself in the new location in the new body instead of the old location in
the old body, then I would think a transfer had taken place.
Now that I think about it, I believe that I am in BOTH camps on the copy
question. After copying, I believe my new copy would think that the
transfer had worked. It would have all the old memories of the old body and
would wake up in the new body. Meanwhile, the original would believe that
the copy had failed. He would remember attempting the copy procedure, but
would remain in the old body with no transference to the new. If the copy
procedure used the sensory transfer above, we could simulate the experience
of transfer for the old copy, but when the original woke up it would still
be in the old body. The new copy would gain the advantage of the new body,
but the original would gain no enhancements. Unfortunately, I am the
original.
-- Harvey Newstrom <http://HarveyNewstrom.com> <http://Newstaff.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:07:52 MST