Watched this last night and got to thinking about the ending. It seems the robots found a way to manipulate the space-time continuum to take a consciousness from the past and put it in the new body. It isn't just a copy, but actually "you". Problem was, the process was deemed a failure because for reasons they couldn't avoid the consciousness extracted from the past could not exist beyond that one day. Arguably, even if they put that consciousness on an artificial body, it would also simply become blank after that period of time. I'm lost. If they could tap into the space/time, why would there be a limit of one day? From my understanding, space/time continues, it doesn't stop. If they could "lock" on to that particular space/time wave, wouldn't that extracted consciousness continue on and live out what the original wave was created on? Kind of like a 4th dimension, whereas you can not create a new conscious, but you would observe what had occurred in the past. Hope this makes sense....wanted to get somebody else's take on it.
The move Artificial Intelligence ending
- Thread starter Schmoe
- Start date
- Status
Reality is the script demanded that manufactured limitation, likely to avoid comparisons to Freejack.
In theory? I think pulling a consciousness from the past via time travel and implanting it into a new AI body crosses so many theoretical realms that we may as well debate whether Captain Marvel could really lift Mjolinr.
Buddhists might say "Oh, that sort of thing has always gone on.".
In theory? I think pulling a consciousness from the past via time travel and implanting it into a new AI body crosses so many theoretical realms that we may as well debate whether Captain Marvel could really lift Mjolinr.
Buddhists might say "Oh, that sort of thing has always gone on.".
Time goes forward. I heard it described simply as change of state. No change of state, no time, eternity. No way to capture consciousness or even understand it IMO. Just looking with eyes is a brain process we can't duplicate. All images we see made by devices have to be interpreted by a brain.
You have to consider these more like science fiction. We don't even know what we do not know.
It is really before the Hypothesis stage, let alone theory or fact.
Save category as warp drives transporters, replicators etc. Fun to think about but a math framework does not even exist
Rod
It is really before the Hypothesis stage, let alone theory or fact.
Save category as warp drives transporters, replicators etc. Fun to think about but a math framework does not even exist
Rod
Why even waste time pondering something like this?
As previously stated. Time is a human construct. Our technology is surpassing our humanity. AI is our future for space exploration. We were not designed for space travel and are bi-pedal; carbon based mammals. (With great potential.)
Perhaps our brain and AI will form a hybrid or we can construct new DNA hybrid.
Perhaps our brain and AI will form a hybrid or we can construct new DNA hybrid.
Originally Posted by Onetor
As previously stated. Time is a human construct. Our technology is surpassing our humanity. AI is our future for space exploration. We were not designed for space travel and are bi-pedal; carbon based mammals. (With great potential.)
No it's not. It is a fundamental property of this universe and has been demonstrated to be so over and over again. Time originated at the same instant as matter and space and is not a "human construct". Where did you learn your cosmology?
As for your second opinion, if that were the case then we would have died the minute we left gravity. The truth is that humans are designed to be flexible.
As previously stated. Time is a human construct. Our technology is surpassing our humanity. AI is our future for space exploration. We were not designed for space travel and are bi-pedal; carbon based mammals. (With great potential.)
No it's not. It is a fundamental property of this universe and has been demonstrated to be so over and over again. Time originated at the same instant as matter and space and is not a "human construct". Where did you learn your cosmology?
As for your second opinion, if that were the case then we would have died the minute we left gravity. The truth is that humans are designed to be flexible.
My dog may want to drive a car or read a book, but it's never going to happen. Humans are no different. We like to think we can do anything but have limitations just like other animals. Machines are something we assemble from things we find in the existing environment, no life or creation there.
I believe I learned in college that anything that could travel faster than the speed of light would have to move backwards in time.
Doesn't mean that there ARE things that travel faster than light, of course.
A sort of corollary is that photons don't experience time...they are emitted and absorbed at the same moment from their point of view.
Interesting stuff!
Doesn't mean that there ARE things that travel faster than light, of course.
A sort of corollary is that photons don't experience time...they are emitted and absorbed at the same moment from their point of view.
Interesting stuff!
Join the Borg
Well it's just a weak plot line. There's some things about time travel when it comes to cosmic strings. But I think to go back in time requires going faster than the speed of light.
I think Stephen Hawking had a party for time travelers once. He only published the date after the party. He said no one showed up.
Originally Posted by Onetor
kschachn,
Perhaps sir! We are two carbon based life forms (animals) pondering our existence. We are all dust in the wind. (In time)
And maybe not even dust if there's proton decay.
I think Stephen Hawking had a party for time travelers once. He only published the date after the party. He said no one showed up.
Originally Posted by Onetor
kschachn,
Perhaps sir! We are two carbon based life forms (animals) pondering our existence. We are all dust in the wind. (In time)
And maybe not even dust if there's proton decay.
Originally Posted by Virtus_Probi
A sort of corollary is that photons don't experience time...they are emitted and absorbed at the same moment from their point of view.
Interesting stuff!
Yes, c is a constant, not just the speed of light. Everything is subject to that constant, no matter where you are on the axis. Massive particles can traverse the time vector as well as the velocity one, but massless particles cannot.
Everything travels at c, one way or another.
A sort of corollary is that photons don't experience time...they are emitted and absorbed at the same moment from their point of view.
Interesting stuff!
Yes, c is a constant, not just the speed of light. Everything is subject to that constant, no matter where you are on the axis. Massive particles can traverse the time vector as well as the velocity one, but massless particles cannot.
Everything travels at c, one way or another.
Originally Posted by Wolf359
And maybe not even dust if there's proton decay.
And what's the lower limit on that? Something like 1 x 10*34 years?
And maybe not even dust if there's proton decay.
And what's the lower limit on that? Something like 1 x 10*34 years?
I get that "time" was something we created to keep order. But if you delve into what is time....time would be movement. Say atoms and electrons...they are constantly moving, and that would be forward as we would understand it. When the big bang happened and everything started moving away from the center, and as it is still moving, is that not time related? To go backward in this time, would mean to reverse order the big bang. From that movie, I take it that that was kind of what they were talking about. The mere fabric of space/time is that they somehow found a way, at the spot that the physical evidence they found, whether it be hair or a piece of bone with DNA fragments, and caught up to it. From that point on, it re-existed with their consciousness, once they rested and lost consciousness, that connectivity was broken and then lost. I know, just a thought experiment that I thought was a pretty neat explanation and wonder if there may be any realization theoretically to it. Why waste time pondering this??? because we can.
Originally Posted by Schmoe
I still think that it is possible to go past light speed. c is not constant nor is it relative. It moves.
Unfortunately there has never been any evidence whatsoever that either one of those is true. No tests have ever shown anything but that it is impossible to exceed the speed of light.
Yes the speed is different in different media but is never exceeded in a vacuum. In fact, the velocity of a massless particle always defines the speed of light.
I still think that it is possible to go past light speed. c is not constant nor is it relative. It moves.
Unfortunately there has never been any evidence whatsoever that either one of those is true. No tests have ever shown anything but that it is impossible to exceed the speed of light.
Yes the speed is different in different media but is never exceeded in a vacuum. In fact, the velocity of a massless particle always defines the speed of light.
Originally Posted by Schmoe
I get that "time" was something we created to keep order. But if you delve into what is time....time would be movement. Say atoms and electrons...they are constantly moving, and that would be forward as we would understand it. When the big bang happened and everything started moving away from the center, and as it is still moving, is that not time related? To go backward in this time, would mean to reverse order the big bang. From that movie, I take it that that was kind of what they were talking about. The mere fabric of space/time is that they somehow found a way, at the spot that the physical evidence they found, whether it be hair or a piece of bone with DNA fragments, and caught up to it. From that point on, it re-existed with their consciousness, once they rested and lost consciousness, that connectivity was broken and then lost. I know, just a thought experiment that I thought was a pretty neat explanation and wonder if there may be any realization theoretically to it. Why waste time pondering this??? because we can.
Time is not just the movement of massive particles, it is instead a separate and distinct property just as mass, velocity and dimension are as well. They all can be manipulated to one extent or another. Time can continue to exist or grind to a halt for particles but movement can continue.
I get that "time" was something we created to keep order. But if you delve into what is time....time would be movement. Say atoms and electrons...they are constantly moving, and that would be forward as we would understand it. When the big bang happened and everything started moving away from the center, and as it is still moving, is that not time related? To go backward in this time, would mean to reverse order the big bang. From that movie, I take it that that was kind of what they were talking about. The mere fabric of space/time is that they somehow found a way, at the spot that the physical evidence they found, whether it be hair or a piece of bone with DNA fragments, and caught up to it. From that point on, it re-existed with their consciousness, once they rested and lost consciousness, that connectivity was broken and then lost. I know, just a thought experiment that I thought was a pretty neat explanation and wonder if there may be any realization theoretically to it. Why waste time pondering this??? because we can.
Time is not just the movement of massive particles, it is instead a separate and distinct property just as mass, velocity and dimension are as well. They all can be manipulated to one extent or another. Time can continue to exist or grind to a halt for particles but movement can continue.
Originally Posted by kschachn
Originally Posted by Wolf359
And maybe not even dust if there's proton decay.
And what's the lower limit on that? Something like 1 x 10*34 years?
Yes, somewhere between 10 to the 34 or 36 years. Hasn't been observed yet so it's still a theory. But time stops at the heat death of the universe.
Originally Posted by Wolf359
And maybe not even dust if there's proton decay.
And what's the lower limit on that? Something like 1 x 10*34 years?
Yes, somewhere between 10 to the 34 or 36 years. Hasn't been observed yet so it's still a theory. But time stops at the heat death of the universe.
Originally Posted by kschachn
Originally Posted by Schmoe
I still think that it is possible to go past light speed. c is not constant nor is it relative. It moves.
Unfortunately there has never been any evidence whatsoever that either one of those is true. No tests have ever shown anything but that it is impossible to exceed the speed of light.
Yes the speed is different in different media but is never exceeded in a vacuum. In fact, the velocity of a massless particle always defines the speed of light.
The only thing that's interesting is quantum entanglement. Einstein called it spooky action at a distance because you can have two entangled particles separated by the distance of the universe and if you take a measurement of one particle, the other one will instantly have the opposite one. As it's random, it doesn't really violate relativity, but does violate locality and local realism.
Originally Posted by Schmoe
I still think that it is possible to go past light speed. c is not constant nor is it relative. It moves.
Unfortunately there has never been any evidence whatsoever that either one of those is true. No tests have ever shown anything but that it is impossible to exceed the speed of light.
Yes the speed is different in different media but is never exceeded in a vacuum. In fact, the velocity of a massless particle always defines the speed of light.
The only thing that's interesting is quantum entanglement. Einstein called it spooky action at a distance because you can have two entangled particles separated by the distance of the universe and if you take a measurement of one particle, the other one will instantly have the opposite one. As it's random, it doesn't really violate relativity, but does violate locality and local realism.
- Status
