Originally posted by AstnerNo, one can't extrapolate anything into the paradoxical concept of infinity. Just to an immeasurably tiny composition - see: "The Measurement Problem" of quantum mechanics. Ergo, 'quantum computer'; or, in this case, femptoscale 'optomechanical-microwave quantum integrated circuitry' within autonomous and adaptive neural-analogues that are a billionth of a meter in size (nano-robots).
Not quite. A synthetic neuron would still have to have a lipid-based membrane as well as the function of to retrieve energy through the ATP to ADP reaction, this alone would cover 5-10% of the width of an axon, which already blows your micro- to nano scale out of proportion.You can't extrapolate that to infinity.
I propose a whole brain of nanorobots, that can be used to integrate a sentient mind into a virtual coupling, independent of substratum.
Originally posted by Dolos
No, one can't extrapolate anything into the paradoxical concept of infinity. Just to an immeasurably tiny composition - see: "The Measurement Problem" of quantum mechanics.
Originally posted by Dolos
Ergo, '[b]quantum computer'; or, in this case, femptoscale 'optomechanical-microwave quantum integrated circuitry' within autonomous and adaptive neural-analogues that are a billionth of a meter in size (nano-robots).[/b]
Originally posted by Dolos
I propose a whole brain of nanorobots, that can be used to integrate a sentient mind into a virtual coupling, independent of substratum.
Originally posted by Dolos
You're thinking purely biologically, I'm proposing an echo of that biological process that functions via quantum entanglement.
Originally posted by Astner
What are you going to build these femtoscaled "nano"-robots from? Protons, neutrons, quarks, and leptons aren't exactly stable.
Oh, don't worry, they're quantum!
Originally posted by Astner
You do know that the standard model doesn't support communication via entanglement, right?
You're forgetting the quantum.
Originally posted by Dolos
I'm referring to the theory that a quantum wave function doesn't have a location.
Originally posted by Dolos
It doesn't not support it, either.
What are you going to build these femtoscaled "nano"-robots from? Protons, neutrons, quarks, and leptons aren't exactly stable.
I have no education or knowledge of nano-engineering and nano-electronic engineering.
Originally posted by Astner
What are you talking about?
The measurement problem was my answer to your claim that it would take an infinitely small space for communication for quantum computers to operate with communication on smaller than neuron parameters within these nanites.
^But the measurement problem isn't even necessarily relevant to a fabricated human brains structure made of nano-robots that have replaced neurons.
Not quite. A synthetic neuron would still have to have a lipid-based membrane as well as the function of to retrieve energy through the ATP to ADP reaction, this alone would cover 5-10% of the width of an axon, which already blows your micro- to nano scale out of proportion.
It wouldn't, a nano robot is a completely different structure than neurons and their dendrites. It might not even produce synapses for all we know, it could transfer information in other ways, see below:
Actually it does, a particle and its anti-particle are in theory the same particle. So even if you were able to create the particle and its anti-particle and successfully isolate them then you still wouldn't be able to gain information that wasn't there in to begin with.
It could be transferring information from one potential wave function to another potential wave function of the same exact particle, that is fluxing from one place to another making up the quantum structure of the atoms within the nanite-neurons. We don't design this with tiny sub-quantum tools, that is just the different structure of a different kind of membrane that resides within a completely different kind of machine than a human neuron.
Again, you're thinking biology, this is the structure and function of something that wouldn't be considered biological in a conventional sense. It comes from improved technology, not from natural evolution.
Originally posted by Dolos
I have no education or knowledge of nano-engineering and nano-electronic engineering.. . .
It could be transferring information from one potential wave function to another potential wave function of the same exact particle, that is fluxing from one place to another making up the quantum structure of the atoms within the nanite-neurons. We don't design this with tiny sub-quantum tools, that is just the different structure of a different kind of membrane that resides within a completely different kind of machine than a human neuron.
There is something about these two statements that I find fascinating.
Originally posted by Dolos
Again, you're thinking biology, this is the structure and function of something that wouldn't be considered biological in a conventional sense. It comes from improved technology, not from natural evolution.
I hate to speak for others but I really doubt that Astner's objection to the idea of instantaneous information transfer in particle/antiparticle pairs came from him thinking like a biologist.
As I recall your can't use quantum "spooky action" to send a message because a) there is no way to control the message and b) there is no way to know which end changed first.
Imagine two boxes each with a digital display inside. When you open either box both of the displays instantly pick a random number and display it, then keep showing it. If you open Box A and see "42," that tells you nothing.You also Maybe it set to "42" when you opened it, maybe it was set to "42" when the other box was opened. The check them is limited by the speed of light. You also can't tell anything from the number because the number is random.
(Astner will tear this apart I'm sure.)
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
The check them is limited by the speed of light.
There is no mass here, so how could it be?
I don't know, this is beyond my zero depth of knowledge on the subject matter.
This was a question for ON, I'm trying to defend the article when I guess I'm not qualified to.
Originally posted by Dolos
There is no mass here, so how could it be?
Because you have to actually go check the other box to find out if it was opened and when. That's what I mean by "check time", simply "the time you need to go check". Any checking you do is forced by the laws of physics to happen slower than light.
Originally posted by Bardock42
Since when?
Since I criticized Dadude for doing it one time and then realized he would hunt me to the ends of the Earth looking for me to slip up and do it myself.
Originally posted by Oliver NorthYes.
didn't I provide an answer?
But Astner started in on how the operation would is implausible.
I tried to foolishly argue technicalities with a more educated individual like I always do.
I don't know why I try to get into arguments when I'm only armed with very vague bits and pieces of information...but I do.
Transhumanism, computer technology, improved society, living standard, and education and career opportunities, even genetic engineering are all very interesting topics for me because I really want to be as ingenious, enhanced, educated, secure and free to do what I want as possible. More than that, I would love to live to see a future super-eco self-sustained city whose every facet is embedded with thinking computers that offer the full knowledge database of planet earth as downloadable content.
I honestly don't see the money-centered world that prevents such things as enduring.
I guess I'm a Trekian.
I highly doubt sects will be able to use such intelligent and liberating technology to kill and conquer like in Dune. But that is, I guess, a viable threat. However, unlike Frank Herbert, I believe that if that happened we'd never destroy the machines that make life so simple for us just because they're being used to conquer us...especially not if we're "transcending", and being made better by becoming cyborgs.
Originally posted by Dolos
I have no education or knowledge of nano-engineering and nano-electronic engineering.
Originally posted by Dolos
The measurement problem was my answer to your claim that it would take an infinitely small space for communication for quantum computers to operate with communication on smaller than neuron parameters within these nanites.
Originally posted by Dolos
^But the measurement problem isn't even necessarily relevant to a fabricated human brain's structure made of nano-robots that have replaced neurons.
Originally posted by Dolos
It wouldn't, a nano robot is a completely different structure than neurons and their dendrites. It might not even produce synapses for all we know, it could transfer information in other ways, see below:
Originally posted by Dolos
It could be transferring information from one potential wave function to another potential wave function of the same exact particle,
Originally posted by Dolos
that is fluxing from one place to another making up the quantum structure of the atoms within the nanite-neurons.
Originally posted by Dolos
We don't design this with tiny sub-quantum tools, that is just the different structure of a different kind of membrane that resides within a completely different kind of machine than a human neuron.
Originally posted by Dolos
Again, you're thinking biology, this is the structure and function of something that wouldn't be considered biological in a conventional sense. It comes from improved technology, not from natural evolution.