We have moved to new forum software and posting here is closed!

PLEASE BOOKMARK THE NEW FORUMS

Posted By: Whitestar Apr 22, 2004 - 05:40 pm

I recently read an article on the net about the conversion of energy into matter. An experiment at Stanford University was accomplished at S.L.A.C. (short for Stanford Linear Accelerator Center). Michael Pidwirny, the guy who wrote it claimed that it might one day be a useful means of teleportation like in Star Trek. Here is a direct quote from him:


"In 1998 researchers at Stanford University's Linear Accelerator Center successfully converted energy into matter. This feat was accomplished by using lasers and incredibly strong electromagnetic fields to change ordinary light into matter. The results of this experiment may allow for the development of variety of technological gadgets. One such development could be matter/energy transporters or food replicators that are commonly seen in some of our favorite science fiction programs."


Here is the website:

http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/6a.html


Here are some links to SLAC's statements released to various publications concerning the experiment:

http://www.slac.stanford.edu/exp/e144/nytimes.html

http://www.slac.stanford.edu/exp/e144/science1202.html


Teleportation has already been accomplished by teleporting a photon's properties, however, not the actual photon itself. For more information, check out the following website:


http://www.aip.org/physnews/graphics/html/teleport.htm


Personally, I don't think that there will ever be a conventional use for converting energy into matter because of the amount of energy contained in one human being. Think about it: if one human can produce thousands of hiroshimas bombs, then you would need thousands of atom bombs worth of energy to create a turkey sandwich. That just doesn't seem practical to me. If that amount of energy were to be released when turning a man into energy, well let's just say there wouldn't be much left of anything for a few thousand miles!


In any conversion of matter, some energy is inevitably lost. If the mass of a person is converted into energy in an uncontrolled way (eg, collision with a very large amount of antimatter, destroying every proton, neutron and electron in your body) then the information that is encoded on the gamma rays (usually) released will be lost.


But let's play with this thought experiment for now. The atoms that compose our bodies are replaced every (7 years?), I've heard (I don't pretend to know the exact figure, but it seems reasonable). If this is the case, then after 7 years, you are physically completely different than you were at the beginning of the 7 year period. Then, in introspect, I realize to myself that I have a continuity of experiences, at least, my stream of consciousness is not noticeably interrupted.


Now imagine for the sake of arugment that teleportation were to be accomplish by converting a person into energy and you had the technology to reverse the process. In addition, you send the information along with the energy.


The question is, would the person survive the procedure, or would the individual cease to exist and be replaced with a replica, who was literally born into existence once the energy was reconverted back into matter with the information? What does everybody else thinks? (Note: I know this question sounds a bit philosophical but I'd be very interested in everyones' opinion anyway.)


regards,

Whitestar

Posted By: Aldan Apr 23, 2004 - 07:39 am

As far as your assertion that too much energy would be required to teleport someone, so it wouldn't be used conventionally...
Remember, the ENIAC had Ks worth of memory! And they thought it was too much - that they could NEVER use it all! Heck, an Apple personal computer (and I'm not even speaking of the Apple 2s, here) had more, MUCH more, computing power than that! Therefore, just because it seems unwieldy NOW doesn't mean that it will be later...

Posted By: Aslan Apr 23, 2004 - 09:26 am

If teleporting an apple, for example, perhaps they could use the energy from the atoms of the apple to teleport it?

Just an ignorant thought. Regardless, we're a long way away.

Thanks for the links, Whitestar!

Posted By: Aldan Apr 23, 2004 - 10:13 am

Ah, but how long is long? That is the true question. Back in the 30s, when science fiction was quite new, the stuff they used was futuristic to them, and they thought that it would either take a VERY long time (hundreds of years) or that it would (basically) be tomorrow to achieve what we did in very few, as in 30-40, years. And look at what they were thinking of as "highly technological"! Wow, have we gone WAY past that in so many areas!

Posted By: Iznardi Apr 23, 2004 - 11:26 am

I've managed to perfect methods of energy/matter conversion in my living room. For instance, I've discovered that if you sit in front of the TV for hours every day (especially while eating ice cream or potato chips) the energy waves emanating from the TV will actually convert themselves into matter, which deposits itself along your midriff and stomach. It's quite amazing, but in the course of three or four years, I've managed to create something like 40 lbs worth of matter just out of TV radiation. Unfortunately, I've never had a chance to write this up for Scientific American.

Posted By: Aldan Apr 23, 2004 - 12:07 pm

Yeah, well these "modern, up-to-date" scientists would just say that it was caloric intake of the ice cream and potato chip variety which caused it, but I think you have the right of it. Mine's not as high as 40, but then again, I am in front of a computer, not a tv, so there may be some correlation...

Posted By: Nomad Apr 23, 2004 - 03:54 pm

Oh Yes, there is a slight variance in the higher level wavelengths of the gamma radiation given off from a pc tube. Your a hoot Iz!

Anyway, Arent the replicators in ST basically storing all the material in a sub atomic level before integrating it into something passing as an apple or something. I recall an ep where someone asked why they could not create a certain engine part. It was because it was made out of a material that they did not have stored... or atleast some complex subatomic partice that they did not have enough of. Anyway, I guess they still would need a large amount of energy to reintegrate the material.

The byproduct of producing Matter by energy collision, btw, would be anti-matter also. Becuase the theory is that matter exists in equal parts. If you slam enery and produce pices of matter, then you will also produce pieces of antimatter.

Posted By: Aslan Apr 24, 2004 - 08:32 pm

Aldan, you're right in that we've developed a large quantity of technology that never would have been dreamed of 50 years ago. On the other hand, people also thought we'd be flying around in bubble cars and colonizing other planets by now.

So how long before we get teleporters in every home? Probably not in our lifetimes. There's just not a lot of research being done in that area. On the other hand, tons of money and hours are going into biotech research. By 2050 I think it much more likely that we'll see wolfmen than replicators.

Posted By: Aldan Apr 25, 2004 - 09:26 am

My point is that we have no idea where an idea will come from. Often a person will come up with an idea that just isn't used by anyone or used well, but then someone else sees it and says, "Aha! THAT'S how I can do this!" and they will then invent a microwave oven or a television or a microcomputer or electronic calculator or cell phone or somesuch. Many of our truly inventive inventions were created by this method.
I agree on the bubble cars and such, though. However, that, of course, was from the 50s & 60s rather than 30s & 40s.

Posted By: Aslan Apr 25, 2004 - 10:58 am

True. We don't know where the next breakthroughs are going to come from. They are, after all, coming out of the hands and minds of human beings (who tend to be pretty unpredictable). And many can be surprises even to their creators. From Isaac Asimov:

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science, the one that heralds new discoveries, is not 'Eureka!' (I found it!) but 'That's funny ...'"

Still, the odds of technological advancement in a particular field go up (in my opinion) as you add people and resources. They say that if you put a million monkeys in a room with a million typewriters, eventually one of them would type one of Shakespeare's masterpieces.

So, while I agree that individual advancements are unpredictable, I think we can predict which AREAS will see the most growth. For example, pharmaceuticals make a lot of money. A lot of that money goes back into research. Seems like we have drugs for just about everything, now. Who would have predicted Viagra in the 40s? Not many. But there were a lot of babies being born in the US and everybody knew they'd get old someday. Thus the capitalistic market would put more money into medical research, including pharmaceuticals. So it could have been predicted during the Baby Boom that health care would make huge advancements during the 90s and 00s.

You buy any of that hogwash?

P.S. Aldan, wouldn't your name look better with an "s" in it? A discussion between Aslan and Alsan would be deliciously confusing.

Posted By: Aldan Apr 25, 2004 - 11:20 am

"And that's not lion."
*Aldan grins back*
So, how do you like being a blatantly obvious reference to Jesus?

Posted By: Aslan Apr 26, 2004 - 05:44 am

It's awesome! The chicks dig it.

Posted By: Aldan Apr 26, 2004 - 07:13 am

I'm sure Manuel's jealous, and angry at his parents...