Could All Help With Signing My Petition
Seasonal1 min ago
Beam Me Up Scotty
comes a step closer , no longer just a dream and seen in the science fiction films
http://
http://
Answers
Naomi, No-one paid him to say it obviously but saying it he has:-
a. got his name on the news
b. piqued everyone's interest about matter transportation
c. Probably ensured his funding continues.
No-one has ever succeeded in transporting an atom because there are laws of physics in the way of them doing so. People have 'transported' photons but even then actually no they haven't really, they moved an identical thing from one place to the other by means of 'entaglement'.
If a person weighed 70kg that would be 3x10 27 ( can't do a little 27 sorry folks) you could either try to quantum teleport them over but you would need to know the exact placement of each atom. So not happening. Then you could scan, move and destroy ( which is really not quite the same thing) but you would need storage in excess of 10,000 times bigger than ALL of the information stored on the planet plus it would takeover 3 million years to transmit all of the data required. By the time you had scanned , disassembled and reassembled the person they would be dead.So not happening. Realistically those are the only two ways and as you can see it's absolutely impossible, as impossible as me flapping my arms and flying off ( no-one would say that was possible if we did more research, or I had more imagination) so not sure why the scientists are getting a hammering here other than they spoiled the nice shiny wish we all have that teleportation might one day be possible. No-one is more disappointed than my geeky self.
a. got his name on the news
b. piqued everyone's interest about matter transportation
c. Probably ensured his funding continues.
No-one has ever succeeded in transporting an atom because there are laws of physics in the way of them doing so. People have 'transported' photons but even then actually no they haven't really, they moved an identical thing from one place to the other by means of 'entaglement'.
If a person weighed 70kg that would be 3x10 27 ( can't do a little 27 sorry folks) you could either try to quantum teleport them over but you would need to know the exact placement of each atom. So not happening. Then you could scan, move and destroy ( which is really not quite the same thing) but you would need storage in excess of 10,000 times bigger than ALL of the information stored on the planet plus it would takeover 3 million years to transmit all of the data required. By the time you had scanned , disassembled and reassembled the person they would be dead.So not happening. Realistically those are the only two ways and as you can see it's absolutely impossible, as impossible as me flapping my arms and flying off ( no-one would say that was possible if we did more research, or I had more imagination) so not sure why the scientists are getting a hammering here other than they spoiled the nice shiny wish we all have that teleportation might one day be possible. No-one is more disappointed than my geeky self.
Good grief what, Naomi? Do you really have no logical argument whatsoever? Cant you add something meaningful to this perhaps, such as explaining HOW you think this might ever be possible instead of huffing and puffing and slagging off people who are trying to have a sensible conversation about something? I'm not scientist, I'm an arty girl, but this is so basic that I thought everyone knew it was impossible. Why are you struggling with this so much?
What do we know? Would you, say, and despite the recent proof of Fermat's Last Theorem, refuse to rule out the possibility that at some point, someone somewhere will be able to stand up and say "Hey, I just realised that you can find two perfect cubes that sum to make a third"?
It is possible, in a proven mathematical theorem, to have sure and certain knowledge in some ways about the future. The question is whether or not this particular thing is one of them. If you are going to continue with the argument "I don't know and no-one else does either" the argument loses any meaning it had, because evidently the actual topic in question no longer matters.
Why, specifically, do the mathematical arguments presented have no meaning to you here? Mathematical arguments need a mathematical refutation. If there is one, I would be interested to hear it and along the way we would all learn something.
It is possible, in a proven mathematical theorem, to have sure and certain knowledge in some ways about the future. The question is whether or not this particular thing is one of them. If you are going to continue with the argument "I don't know and no-one else does either" the argument loses any meaning it had, because evidently the actual topic in question no longer matters.
Why, specifically, do the mathematical arguments presented have no meaning to you here? Mathematical arguments need a mathematical refutation. If there is one, I would be interested to hear it and along the way we would all learn something.
Not everyone over 30 is a doddering half-wit, you know. lol.
Cant speak for everyone,. but I don't care whether its possible or not. Its about the sheer arrogance of 'some' people who keep asserting they know everything and no-one else's thoughts or opinions have any value. A listen to me or I'm taking my Bunsen burner home attitude. Perhaps a course in communication should be compulsory with every science degree.
Cant speak for everyone,. but I don't care whether its possible or not. Its about the sheer arrogance of 'some' people who keep asserting they know everything and no-one else's thoughts or opinions have any value. A listen to me or I'm taking my Bunsen burner home attitude. Perhaps a course in communication should be compulsory with every science degree.
Then it's settled, I think. Of course there are things going on in our Universe that we aren't aware of. I just doubt that this is going to turn out to be one of them. Not much else more to say.
I don't mean to be arrogant, svejk. It's just necessarily true that a) no-one knows everything, b) everyone knows something, and c) what people know aren't going to be the same. I'm only hoping to share what I know. If after all some people know the same thing, or more than me, then in trying to share you could point out the errors in my thinking. And believe me, there are loads of those. But please, please don't interpret the desire to share as arrogance. It's trying to be helpful.
I don't mean to be arrogant, svejk. It's just necessarily true that a) no-one knows everything, b) everyone knows something, and c) what people know aren't going to be the same. I'm only hoping to share what I know. If after all some people know the same thing, or more than me, then in trying to share you could point out the errors in my thinking. And believe me, there are loads of those. But please, please don't interpret the desire to share as arrogance. It's trying to be helpful.
