How would you solve the problem? The Galactic Supreme Court would certainly appreciate it. — David Mo

Well considering alpha- centauri is 4.36 light years from earth, in order to send information between these two machines by any "rays" of the electromagnetic kind which obey the speed of light as a maximum travelling velocity, there would be approximately 4.3 years of time elapsed between the point at which the information was collected and when the retransmission was received in either direction.

I would imagine the process would have some kind of accountability as most travel services do, either a log time for each session or a record in storage of data which was collected during the running of the machines or CCTV footage, identity processing etc. You would also have witnesses -others that travelled from the origin to the destination around the same time, staff that work at the teleportation centre, perhaps a passport security point or other human or robotic contacts that register your travel in some form.

By that fact you could simply examine the records and perform an investigation to see which identity can be previously accounted for within 4.3 years of using the machine both forward and backwards in time. This would determine at the very least the direction of travel which could be used to establish the original being.

On failing this you could take biopsies from both individuals and examine the length of their telomeres in their DNA. With every successive generation of cellular replication a telomere shortens (loss of genetic code). Bearing in mind that the two individuals could not have existed simultaneously for a period of 4 years, the one with the shorter telomeres is the individual whose genetic code has been replicating for 4 years longer while the other was travelling (in a static copied stait of information). Therefore the shorter telomered person would be eliminated as the older "post" travel outdated version.

If this cannot be achieved for some impossibly unlikely reason, without sufficient evidence to identify the original the supreme galactic courts would have no choice but to permit the existence of two separate selves as the prevention of failure of the machine was not the under the direct responsibility of the passenger.

However limits on travel between worlds could be enforced to prevent them crossing paths or residing in the same jurisdiction/ area where they could encounter one another.

It's much simpler than that. When you hit your finger with the hammer, it hurts. When you hit the TV, it doesn't. — David Mo

I think if I hammered my TV is would be very painful for me. Haha. I would feel the negative impacts, hurt, anguish and frustration of having to go buy a new TV for a start. What impact does the concept of "possession/ ownership" or "functionality" or "value" of material objects to a person have on its ability to register as "pain" or another emotional state or sensation in the subject. I hit my finger it hurts as a location in my body. I hit the TV it hurts- but in a qualitatively less injurious way and more psychologically.

fell in love with different females of different species, — Olivier5

Did you just assume their gender? (/sexual orientation) Haha :p

M = Only material things are affected by material things

What needs to be proved is that if x is affected by something physical then that x has to be physical. — TheMadFool

Define "material". Is this to say things made of "matter" or things that exist. If it is the first than it would be preposterous- clearly forces affect matter. In fact no matter or "material" can influence other material without forces and dimension between them.

But... as you'll find with any matter (material) if you supply it with enough energy (such as speed or heat); first the bonds will be broken, then the cloud of gaseous atoms will be made into a plasma of free flowing electrons and nuclei and then even those will be accelerate into their equivalent under relativity = pure energy. So when is matter no longer a material? Can I destroy matter? Or is energy simply that form of material which is uncertain enough in its state and high enough in its potential to influence matter?

Consciousness is a mental state of entangled, integrated, and unified information.
— Pop

And what is mental? — David Mo

Thank you for pointing this out. It seems I am still somewhat stuck in oldspeak!
I should have written:
" Consciousness is a cognitive state of entangled, integrated, and unified information "

There, no doubt you will now agree :)

If consciousness is not strictly materialist in origin- being nothing more than a complex product of chemical reactions and electrical impulses of cells, then why can we completely alter the state of consciousness/our experience with chemicals, drugs or neurotransmitters. — Benj96

Consciousness is what's in between all the brain stuff. Think of consciousness as the "other side", the side that is sealed off by matter in the brain. I believe the brain created a "private zone", and that's where you exist, your thoughts, feelings, emotions, perceptions (and all the other goodies).

Ideas to consider: The binding problem, and the privacy of consciousness.

By definition consciousness is a state of integrated information as it is not possible to have a state of consciousness without integrated and entangled information!

Entangled and integrated information gives rise to consciousness.

A cognitive state where information is not entangled, integrated, and unified is ineffable.

There is much more to consciousness, but that it is a state of entangled, integrated, and unified information is certain, and on top of this much can be built - unlike the dead end old conception of mind with perception and consciousness as subsets - so silly! Integrated information is fundamental to all thought, and subsequent action. Entangled, integrated, and unified information describes consciousness - and it is present all over our Goldilocks universe.

integrated and entangled information! — Pop

I bet no one here (including me) knows what "integrated and entangled information" is. :lol:

If consciousness is entangled, integrated and unified information, then it has a spectrum:

2 bits of info.......................to................................gazillions of bits of info.

Thus consciousness could be attributed throughout the universe.

Thus a rock would be conscious - a very simple form of conscious at the bottom end of the spectrum, whilst humanity would be at the higher end of the spectrum.

Thus a rock would be conscious — Pop

I would bet all my money that rocks are not conscious.

integrated and entangled information!
— Pop
I bet no one here (including me) knows what "integrated and entangled information" is. :lol: — Wheatley

IIT theory and GW theory are new theories of consciousness. They posit that consciousness is a state of unified information.From an idealist's perspective - everything outside of consciousness is information. When this various information is compressed into a unit it becomes a concept - this process describes consciousness. The question is dose consciousness do this? or dose consciousness arise because of this?

Thus a rock would be conscious
— Pop
I would bet all my money that rocks are not conscious. — Wheatley

Not conscious in the way humans are - but note humanity is conscious in different ways - on a spectrum.
Animals are also conscious, but to a lesser extent. Ecologists are describing plant consciousness.

Ecologists are describing plant consciousness. — Pop

Put what do mineralogist say about rocks?

↪Pop Put what do mineralogist say about rocks? — Wheatley

This was a hypothetical suggestion contingent upon accepting that consciousness arises from entanglement, integration and unification. You will accept, I'm sure, that rocks are entangled, integrated , and unified. Obviously they are nowhere near as conscious as we are. But a spectrum of consciousness would be a way to attribute consciousness to them.

The issue is that consciousness is part of the fabric of the universe, so it should be distributed in some way throughout the universe.

You will accept, I'm sure that rocks are entangled, integrated , and unified. — Pop

I'm not a mineralogist.

The issue is that consciousness is part of the fabric of the universe, so it should be distributed in some way throughout the universe. — Pop

You make it sound like consciousness is stuff, and I don't believe that consciousness can be accurately be described as "stuff". It doesn't matter how spooky you describe the "stuff", I still don't think it is conscious.

You make it sound like consciousness is stuff. I don't believe that consciousness can be accurately be described as "stuff". It doesn't matter how spooky you describe the "stuff", I still don't think it is consciousness. — Wheatley

I'm sorry you find it spooky. I don't find it spooky at all. I believe humanity is part of the flora and fauna of the planet, is a complex biological system , but not special. We share attributes with everything else, and everything else shares attributes with us. We have the most complex consciousness of course.

What i posit is highly speculative, and If it dose not resonate with your understanding, i can respect that you wont believe it :)

I believe humanity is part of the flora and fauna of the planet, is a complex biological system — Pop

That's better. :wink:

What i posit is highly speculative, and If it dose not resonate with your understanding, i can respect that you wont believe it :) — Pop

Nothing wrong with speculation. I just get annoyed with all the spooky language, especially when many of us don't know what you mean. But sure it's just me, I don't see anyone else getting annoyed.

Carry on! :victory:

it is possible for the theatre to be empty, — bert1

The metaphor of the theater doesn't work with consciousness. You can describe an empty stage. You cannot describe an empty consciousness. Consciousness is literally what happens in consciousness. Nothing more.

so that consciousness does not entail content necessarily (it is possible for the theatre to be empty — bert1

The thing is when I have localized anesthetic it doesn't feel like something is missing. It feels like it no longer exists or doesn't belong to me. Like the theatre has been rearranged.

For the existence of consciousness requires complex organic matter. — Vladimir Krymchakov

why organic?

The OP isn't, it's consciousness in general. — bert1

The philosopher said that what you can't talk about is best left unsaid.

It's consistent with two theories: — bert1

It is also consistent with the myth of Hades and the Styx lake. But that doesn't mean that we are going to consider all the infinite combinations consistent with the concept of consciousness. We are talking about the one that responds to the facts that we know. And the basic fact is that, with the brain gone, we find no trace of that consciousness anywhere, which (almost) certainly implies that it has disappeared from the world.

What is consciousness then? If you introspect into your consciousness you will find experiences and emotions. Nothing more. Remove the experiences and emotions and your consciousness will be empty. — David Mo

How can you separate experience and consciousness?

What is consciousness then? If you introspect into your consciousness you will find experiences and emotions. Nothing more. Remove the experiences and emotions and your consciousness will be empty. — David Mo

Consciousness is emptiness! A very strange kind of emptiness.

They exist, but are grounded upon a more basic and holistic form of reality, — Mickey

Correct me if I am wrong, but Heidegger did not identify the Being with any form of consciousness. Therefore, turning to Heidegger to justify that consciousness exists outside the brain doesn't seem helpful. Therefore, I ask you to describe this Being common to all things and to explain what makes you think it is a consciousness that exists outside the human brain. In your own words, if possible.

And the basic fact is that, with the brain gone, we find no trace of that consciousness anywhere, — David Mo

The below link leads to a video: Making Decisions without Brains.

https://youtu.be/1LyeWQZ7ZR0

However limits on travel between worlds could be enforced to prevent them crossing paths or residing in the same jurisdiction/ area where they could encounter one another. — Benj96

The Galactic Court appreciates your efforts to resolve the case but regrets to say that they have not been helpful. The DNA of the two Mr. X's is identical. Impossible to tell them apart. The fact of one's precedence does not resolve their differentiation in the present because, being the exact replica, the problem is not one of precedence, but one of present rights of the person, which are well defined in the Declaration of Rights of the Person and the Animal proclaimed by the Great Luthor in the second year of his Blessed Universal Regency.

We take this opportunity to inform you that the case has been resolved after the declaration of Mrs. X before the Galactic Court, in the sense that Mr. X-Alpha is much more fun than Mr. X-Earth and more affectionate so she doesn't give a damn which one is the original, because she keeps the one of Alpha.
The Court has ruled that, although ideally identical at the moment of conception, the two Mr. X's become different at the 0+1 instant when both begin to have different sensations and emotions. Therefore the Court has decided to condemn the company Calamity Viajes Siderales with a fine of 100,000 neobitcoins to be paid as a wedding gift for the X-Alpha couple.

Do you accept the verdict?

I think if I hammered my TV is would be very painful for me. — Benj96

Everyone has their own tastes.

but in a qualitatively less injurious way and more psychologically. — Benj96

You have just recognized an important difference between the "psychological" and the exterior of the mind. I would add another: in an immediate way, without the need to resort to hammers or other extreme means, you have the intuition that the TV is out there, it is an object of the world. In the same way, you don't hit your mother-in-law with the hammer, even though sometimes she may deserve it, because you immediately recognize her as a human being and, more importantly, you feel recognized as such by your mother-in-law. This recognition takes place especially through the look. All of the lucubrations about solipsism, subjectivity and objectivity, are subsequent to this basic intuitive recognition. Since I find no reason to doubt it, I accept this intuition and it seems to me that it is the cornerstone of my world or my life.

There, no doubt you will now agree — Pop

There are a lot of objects that offer entangled, integrated, and unified information. A schedule board, a newspaper page, a puzzle book, my hat tag... I don't think any of them have a consciousness.

Not conscious in the way humans are - but note humanity is conscious in different ways - on a spectrum.
Animals are also conscious, but to a lesser extent. Ecologists are describing plant consciousness. — Pop

You've decided that anything has a conscience because conscience is anything. There's no one there who won't agree with this logic.
But I doubt that the ecologists will agree with you and say that plants have a consciousness. Where have you read this?

How can you separate experience and consciousness? — Pop

As used in this thread the term "consciousness" (as equivalent to "mind") cannot be. Experience is one of the elements that form consciousness.

Consciousness is emptiness! A very strange kind of emptiness. — Wheatley

If you separate it from the experiences, emotions and thoughts. It's nothing, apart from this.