this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2025
141 points (98.0% liked)
chapotraphouse
13687 readers
192 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I'm pretty confident it's not. If a book burns to ash, you can't piece it back together.
There's a theory in quantum mechanics that information can never be destroyed, it merely changes forms. No human could put a burned book back together with their bare hands, obviously, but all the pieces are still there. Nothing was actually lost. It's just in a different form, and perhaps with the right techniques it can be put back together again.
In fact, scientists are successfully managing to read burned scrolls that were destroyed in the Pompeii eruption right now.
Information in the quantum physics context is not the same as information in the normal context. Things can be irretrievably forgotten or destroyed. For example, if you approach a stainless steel block sitting on a concrete pad in an isolated environment, how would you determine how long it's been there? There's no way to tell from simply observing that system. Or for a very different example, the cultural and linguistic practices of many Native American nations are entirely lost to history - much simply cannot refer be determined through the limited means available to us
Certainly, but we're talking about Sufficiently Advanced technology. Might there, someday, be means available to us that would allow us to do this? It's speculative for sure, but I wouldn't be confident ruling it out.
Wouldn't (maybe the right word is "shouldn't") there be a difference between information and meaning?
You can reconstruct a book but will it mean the same thing after reconstruction?
I have no idea what you mean.
The meaning comes from the words, not the book the words are written on. If a different book has the same words in the same order it sure seems like it would mean the same thing imo
(just thoughts from watching AI widgets try to make pictures)
If I took a book that had 1 millions characters in its text and overlapped each character on the same spot on the same page, but otherwise made no other changes, all the "parts" of the book are there but its meaning has changed.
Kinda like trying to read something in a dream. I'll open a book, look at the page, and see gibberish but "know" that the text is supposed to be saying something specific. If I was able to write down the gibberish and give it to somebody else to read, they wouldn't get the same meaning out of it.
Sure, you also have to have the same words in the same order in the same font in the same color in the same pattern on the page. That's what I meant though, the meaning does not come from the literal paper the book is made of - even an ebook has the same meaning as a paperback. Not everyone likes ebooks, of course, so for them they get a reprint of the old book.
And I do not think a "reprinted" person, made of meat with all the same stuff in their brain, is any different than the original. At the very least, my clone and I will certainly agree about this. I wouldn't make the decision for anyone else, but for my collective selves we will happily be replaced.
This attachment to the original body is sentimental imo. That doesn't make it meaningless, but if it's a choice between being a clone or being nothing? I'll take a clone body please.