X-Message-Number: 3733 Date: Mon, 23 Jan 1995 19:39:46 -0500 From: "Bruce Zimov" <> Subject: SCI.CRYONICS: Uploading On the topic of superconducting brains: Brian Wowk writes: > Frankly this line of thinking is plain nuts. and John Clark writes: > that's loony. Of course, it wouldn't be "normal" biochemistry! I agree. I probably also agree that is "nuts" and "loony". However, suggestions such as these are called non-lateral thinking, and if you don't explore every possibility you might miss something. I was just thinking that since cryonics is supposed to preserve the network topology, and since any global mental effects are on a connectionist view a consequence of electrical activity on the network and since superconductivity is a "cold" way to get this activity, that there might be some "effect" to be discovered. That the meme produced not one but two ad hominems is probably a good sign. But, I can't do the experiment and those that can have read it. If you're asking me whether or not I believe as you do that it is a very very low probability event in a frozen brain, then, of course, I agree. But, in superconductors in general, I'm sure we can construct a superconducting computer system. Also, a flat line is defined by the sensitivity of your instruments. John Clark writes: >The foundation of modern physics is the idea of >Exchange Forces ,a direct consequence of The Identity Of >Indiscernibles. First, its not the foundation. Second, its not a direct consequence of Leibniz's theory, it is more a consequence of gauge theory and follows from the mathematics of Lie groups, and the fact that if you take the derivative of a constant you get zero. >you insist on giving individuality to quantum particles No I don't. Their non-locality is described by Bell's theorem. All I am saying is that at the scale of 2 brains across the room from each other, quantum effects do not come into play in your claim that if you were one of them and that one terminated then you would somehow continue without loss of subjective continuity in the other one. > Where does consciousness exist? Spatial location does not apply to mental entities. You are pointing out something that is well known. But, identity theorists hold that the correspondence to brain structure and function will eventually be worked out, and so the answer "somewhere within your skull" is a reasonable one. That's one reason why we freeze heads. On numerical identity: Let's consider Parfit's example: Two white billiard balls, identical in every way except their position. Now, you wouldn't say there is one billiard ball there would you? Yet, everything you have said about identity has led you to believe that there is only one. There isn't. There are 2. What if you switched them? Of course, you couldn't tell them apart. But, if they were subjective and you were one, you would have moved to the other position! And you'd know it. Bruce Zimov Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=3733