X-Message-Number: 21276
Date: Wed, 26 Feb 2003 00:31:08 +0100
From: Henri Kluytmans <>
Subject: building a duplicate vitrified body scenario

Francois wrote :

>Ok, lets bring that up a notch. You have a vitrified body. A duplicate of
>that body is made by scanning it at the atomic level and building a second
>one, with the same atoms in the same place, linked in the same way and with
>the same distribution of electrical charges and with magnetic domains, if
>any, oriented in the same way. Now you have two vitrified bodies that are
>indistinguishable. No experiment, even in principle, can distinguish between
>the two. Do we agree on that?

Dear Francois,

I used almost this same hypothetical scenario here on cryonet a couple 
of years ago. I thought that at least everybody here would agree with 
me. But it seems that some people do not... 

===========

This was my scenario :

"Your body is frozen (in this hypothetical example it will 
be a perfect vitrification, so no repairs will be necessary). 

Your body is taken apart atom by atom. All the atoms 
are labeled when they are stored away. The locations 
of every atom are stored in a database. Then the body 
is build up again, atom by atom, to its original state. 
Every original atom is put in its old place. The body 
is reanimated.

Would you mind ?"

===========

And to my amazement some people did!

I pointed out to them, that according to current physical 
theories the bodies before and after disassembly are chemically 
and biologically identical...

Then I wrote this :

"Some people claim that some new and still unknown physical 
mechanisms will be required to explain how are our brain 
(i.e our consciousness) functions. Please note that a conscious 
state implies a running (i.e. living, animated) state. Although 
I disagree with this, because I think that there are no good 
reasons to have to assume new physical mechanisms for explaining 
the mind (applying Occams razor), most of those people at least 
seem to agree with me regarding a deanimated state.

They agree that in case of a *frozen* state *NO new physics* is 
required to describe our brain. I.e. they agree that a complete 
chemical description (as according to conventional physics) of the 
structure of a frozen body is sufficient to recreate that body.

Now you seem to go a step further! You claim that even in a 
frozen state new unknown physics is required for describing 
the body. You claim that a frozen body (at for example 10 
degrees Kelvin) is more than just a chemical structure of 
molecules and atoms !!!

I would like to know : "What is your scientific motivation to 
assume the necessity of some new and unknown physics ?"

What new physics and why ???

PLEASE EXPLAIN TO ME !!!! : "What kind of unknown physical 
processes are taking place in a chemical structure at 10 
degrees Kelvin ???
"

===========

Of course, I got no clear answer on this.

--

I came up with this hypothetical scenario because of objections 
against me seeing a person as an information process.

If one doesn't assume that any new or unknown chemistry or physics 
is required to describe a frozen body at a very low temperatures 
(for example at 10 degrees Kelvin), then one should agree that a 
frozen mind is only information. If this de-animated or "not-running" 
state of our mind is only information then it is only a logical 
induction that the animated or "running" situation must then be 
an information process.


Cheers,
>Hkl

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=21276