That's not teleportation, that's just recreation. Which is a pretty good idea for cloning or such, but doesn't really satisfy the theory of teleporting.selfAdjoint said:The situation at present is that they have "teleported" photons and electrons. I put the word in quotes because they actually destroy the particle at its old location and recreate "it" at a new one. And I put "it" in quotes because with elementary particles there are issues of "what do you mean, same particle?"
What? Elaborate.Gold Barz said:Yeah, but thats just the present.
Quite right. But AFAIK, there are no theories that would support anything better than that.Gold Barz said:I meant thats what our current technology could do, "re-create" not really teleport that actual "thing" that was teleported.
Noir indeed! "Let me send you to a star"..."I can do it, but did I mention that nobody I've sent so far has bothered to write home?" "Darned ingrates!"selfAdjoint said:Quite right. But AFAIK, there are no theories that would support anything better than that.
Once I had this idea for a science fiction story. This is NOT REAL PHYSICS! Just bafflegab for a story.....I forgot to mention that the story was to be noir.
YOU wouldn't ever get there. That is to say, you would be destroyed then recreated, by this method at least. Wether or not it would actually be YOU is beyond me. This is also assuming they could destroy you piece by piece and recreate you. Kind of like in that one fiction novel by Michael Crichton, Timeline.Unknowing said:What is the difference between re-creation and teleportation as long as you get there?
Yeah, it would probably function great as a copy machine, but as for _moving_ people, I don't think it's possible. Copying, yes, moving, no, at least not with "you" still being "you".Garth said:But it would make the ultimate photocopier would it not?
Just my luck to try it when there's a paper jam.......