🚀 go-pugleaf

In <7iahi6$8nk$1@bgtnsc01.worldnet.att.net> "Danny Boy"
<danny_._boy@worldnet.att.net> writes: 
>
>True, true, but specifically, I was referring to the inability to know
both
>the position and momentum of a subatomic particle simultaneously.  One
would
>definitely have to use what, in the Star Trek universe, is called
either
>'imaging scanners' or 'targeting scanners' to observe the position and
>momentum of each subatomic particle in an object in order to transport
it.
>The problem with observing subatomic particles has always been the
fact
>that, by merely observing them, you interfere with them.  If you shine
a
>really tiny flashlight on a subatomic particle, long before the light
>rebounds back to the observer, it has already moved the particle
(change in
>position).  Furthermore, the light also changes the velocity of the
particle
>slightly (change in momentum).  Worse yet, Heisenberg found that the
>discrepencies caused in both the position and momentum of observed
subatomic
>particles had an inverse relationship.  This basically means that the
more
>you know (observe) about one, the further off the other becomes.  It's
a bad
>problem for Star Trek, but I'll suspend my disbelief for a good show
any
>day. . .
>


    And again, you really should have paid more attention.  First, you
don't need to know anything about subatomic particles to send a person
as information.  The information that makes you you, is not in your
subatomic particles, but in the gross arrangment of your atoms.  You
subatomic particles move around all the time-- do you stop being you? 
Are you scrambled every second and come out a new person?  No.  No more
than changing the type font in that book you're reading makes it a
different novel.  The novel is hardier than that.  It lives in an
information realm much more course than the little bits of ink that
make a fat capital A or a thin one.

   As for you, you're encoded at a level mostly far larger than atomic
scale, where Heisenberg doesn't cause problems.  Position and momentum
for a particle in a box (say) can be determined only to a limit which
is about h/2pi, but that's a small number.  To find out what it means
in the body, you really have to work the math.  Water molecules in the
body have average energies of around kT, and momenta of SQRT(2Em) =
SQRT(2kTm) = ~ 1.6e-23 kg*m/sec.  If you divide h/2pi, which is about
10^-34 J*sec, by this number, you get about 6.6^-12 meters, which is
about 1/15th of an Angstrom.  Since water molecules are around 3 A
across, you can see that localizing one to 2% of it's own size ought to
be plenty good enough.  For larger molecules the tolerances get even
better.