Do transporters kill?

[sonofccn]

Now if this , when the mind is simply copied into a clone body, is not considered kill, what about procedure where the body is perfectly recreated, too?

Well I don't see it that way because all you are doing is copying data. There is nothing stopping you from filling up a room full of six's, all convinced they are the real one and all equally delusional. You kill six and a new six awakens down to the final moment but that doesn't help the six that did the dying. That unique unit, that snowflake, has ceased and will never be again.

But that's the question: what makes a lining thing unique? The atoms it consists of are replaced several times over the life time, so why would a simultaneous replacement be different? Isn't that then, by your definition we are all copies,, i.e. each time all atoms are replaced it is considered old "I" die and a new is called in its place?

The differnce, to me at least, is that my conconcious has been carried along as my body "replaced itself" and that the me who went to sleep last night is the me who woke up today. I am a solid line. A copy is a new line. As an example say I destroyed 6's power supply, just for the purpuses of this line of thought, which would "kill" the tincan as much as anything and presumbly in the final milisecond or so of its existence it would transmite its "datafiles" to be uploaded in a fresh new body. All well and good. A new 6 awakens and continues its plots and plans with nary a pause. Then I repair the alpha 6's power supply and reactivate it. That would create two six's and the original would not be privy to the additional life experiances the other enjoyed while I tinkered with its innards, would not in fact have been aware the process had worked at all. The two were/are distinctly seperate, lines painted side by side as opposed to the continuiation of a single one.

Now replace the robot with your self with the caveat your playing the original and noone is bringing you back. Would you still step onto a machine that will kill you and make a "quantum duplicate"?

[Who is like God arbour]

What is the difference between transferring data and copying data?

If the transporter does not copy a person but transfers the data which defines the person, is the so transferred person killed?

Take your example with No. 6. What if the informations that defines her are not copied but transferred so that they are irrevocably lost in the remaining body. Imagine, that - due to some quantum mechanic rules - it is not possible, to really copy theses informations but to only transfer them.

How does that change your position?

[sonofccn]

What is the difference between transferring data and copying data?

Well in terms of data none. When you "transfer" data from one computer to another all you are doing is copying it, the files don't vanish from your hardrive after all, instead of physically moving anything.

Now when I say Transfer in accordence with transporting a human I mean something akin to physically mailing something. The object is moved from point A to point B. Copying I refer to something akin to faxing, a copy is made of the object but the original stays put, or is destroyed.

If the transporter does not copy a person but transfers the data which defines the person, is the so transferred person killed?

If evidence exists that the person's "essence" is carried over, not merely duplicated, than I would not considered the person killed.

How does that change your position?

Assumng the above? I would have no problems with this method of transport.

[Who is like God arbour]

If evidence exists that the person's "essence" is carried over, not merely duplicated, than I would not considered the person killed.

Matter is only frozen energy with informations.

To me it seems as if the transporter is only unfreezing that matter, transmitting the energy to the destination, where it gets refreezed.

There seems to be no way to only unfreeze matter with a transporter.

If that were possible, nobody in the Star Trek universe would need antimatter.

They could simply beam matter in a ships warp core without refreezing it.

The released energy should be E = m x c².

As long as less energy is needed for the transport, they should gain huge amounts of energy.

And we have to assume, that less energy is needed for a transport.

Because otherwise a ship, that transports a few persons (let us say five persons á 80 kg), would have to have huge amounts of energy (400 kg x c²) only for that transport.

And I'm sure that we have seen the transport of four or five persons from and to a Danube-class-Runabout.

Therefore to me it seems plausible that the transporter only force the matter into energy for a short time and that the energy without that force reassembles itself to matter with the in the energy contained informations.

[Praeothmin]

If the transporter does not copy a person but transfers the data which defines the person, is the so transferred person killed?

If evidence exists that the person's "essence" is carried over, not merely duplicated, than I would not considered the person killed.

But it is transferred over, since a person going through the Transporter comes out exactly the same physically, but also socially, psychologically, emotivaly, and intellectually.
That shows that the person is completely reformed, with nothing lost, and since people who went through the Transporters can still have metaphysical experiences (see Sisko's entire career), then it is proof that their "souls" are also transported, or carried over, to the new location...
The only problem with the Transporter is that it can copy you and create another you (Riker in TNG), but the original wasn't killed or destroyed, simply altered and then put back as is...

[sonofccn]

If the transporter does not copy a person but transfers the data which defines the person, is the so transferred person killed?

If evidence exists that the person's "essence" is carried over, not merely duplicated, than I would not considered the person killed.

But it is transferred over, since a person going through the Transporter comes out exactly the same physically, but also socially, psychologically, emotivaly, and intellectually.
That shows that the person is completely reformed, with nothing lost, and since people who went through the Transporters can still have metaphysical experiences (see Sisko's entire career), then it is proof that their "souls" are also transported, or carried over, to the new location...
The only problem with the Transporter is that it can copy you and create another you (Riker in TNG), but the original wasn't killed or destroyed, simply altered and then put back as is...

Sorry I was being unclear again. I was using "transporters" in a more general sense. I have stated that I don't believe Trek transporters kill you, for reasons you and others have sited from Vulcans keeping thier souls to being fully coherent in the stream,etc. I was speaking more from a ethical viewpoint on what would and would not constitute killing the transportee not arguing about Trek transporters. Sorry for the confusion.

[sonofccn]

If evidence exists that the person's "essence" is carried over, not merely duplicated, than I would not considered the person killed.

Matter is only frozen energy with informations.

To me it seems as if the transporter is only unfreezing that matter, transmitting the energy to the destination, where it gets refreezed.

There seems to be no way to only unfreeze matter with a transporter.

If that were possible, nobody in the Star Trek universe would need antimatter.

They could simply beam matter in a ships warp core without refreezing it.

The released energy should be E = m x c².

As long as less energy is needed for the transport, they should gain huge amounts of energy.

And we have to assume, that less energy is needed for a transport.

Because otherwise a ship, that transports a few persons (let us say five persons á 80 kg), would have to have huge amounts of energy (400 kg x c²) only for that transport.

And I'm sure that we have seen the transport of four or five persons from and to a Danube-class-Runabout.

Therefore to me it seems plausible that the transporter only force the matter into energy for a short time and that the energy without that force reassembles itself to matter with the in the energy contained informations.

As stated I don't believe Trek transporters kill you. How precisly they do what they do is up to debate, as you pointed out it's slightly complexed when you began to think about it, but you live through it that I don't doubt.

[Roondar]

On the other hand, I'd have to be pretty darn suicidal to walk into a real-world transporter device (if one of those ever would exist) because quantum entanglement or no, I want my own atoms to stay put darnit.

/McCoy