3 ms·

I know what a paradox is, and your application falls quite a bit short from the very definition you give. 'Depending on how you view it', a rainbow could be cau

I know what a paradox is, and your application falls quite a bit short from the very definition you give. 'Depending on how you view it', a rainbow could be caused by light refraction or by a farting unicorn. This statement doesn't make a rainbow a 'paradox', there is nothing inexplicable about it.

jodrellblank 5y ago
That you observe two different behaviours of light, one like a particle, one like a wave, and they clash and cannot both be true could be paradoxical. That one person says a rainbow is caused by farting unicorns, is not paradoxical. We have agreed ideas on what it means "to be" someone, matching genetic information at the scene of a crime with a suspect says the suspect was at the crime scene. We also have agreed ideas that people cannot be in the same place at the same time, so if two people are in different places at the same time they must be different people. The teletransporter makes it possible to have two people in different places (must be different people) who are also "the same" person by any other test we have. They can't be both the same and different, but paradoxically they must be. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendship_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendship_paradox can be explained, that doesn't stop it being, or appearing, paradoxical.
- nautilius 5y ago
  But you just declare that my rainbow is not paradoxical, your argument for the teleporter provides no logic beyond it. Here, I also declare “there is no teleporter paradox”. Are you convinced? A mere contradiction does not imply a paradox. Other than that, we already have the exact situation you describe: a twin on the crime scene will leave the exact genetic information. Does that mean there is a paradox? No. Does that mean it has to be the same person? No. It’s two different conscious entities that happen to have the same DNA. Just like a copied person. No problem, no contradiction, no paradox.
  - jodrellblank 5y ago
    If a unicorn farted to create rainbows, my ability to see rainbows could still be based on their refracting of light. Both could be true simultaneously and not contradict each other. If the criminal is honest and wants to admit their crime, the Twins scenario will result in one denying the crime and one admitting it, correctly. If you imprison them both it would be unjust for one of them. If you imprison one of them and the other goes free, no injustice is done. If one human did the shooting, stepped into the teleporter, now two humans are honestly admitting to it, what do you do? If you imprison only one of them - one shooter, one person in prison - is that justice? If so, which one do you imprison and why? The other one experiences comitting a shooting and admitting to it and walking free unpunished, that doesn't seem right. If you imprison them both, then you must at some level agree they are both the same person who pulled the trigger, yes? If you don't agree they are both the same person who pulled the trigger and both need punishing, which one isn't and what's the difference about that one?

jodrellblank 5y ago

That you observe two different behaviours of light, one like a particle, one like a wave, and they clash and cannot both be true could be paradoxical. That one person says a rainbow is caused by farting unicorns, is not paradoxical. We have agreed ideas on what it means "to be" someone, matching genetic information at the scene of a crime with a suspect says the suspect was at the crime scene. We also have agreed ideas that people cannot be in the same place at the same time, so if two people are in different places at the same time they must be different people. The teletransporter makes it possible to have two people in different places (must be different people) who are also "the same" person by any other test we have. They can't be both the same and different, but paradoxically they must be. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendship_paradox https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendship_paradox can be explained, that doesn't stop it being, or appearing, paradoxical.

nautilius 5y ago
But you just declare that my rainbow is not paradoxical, your argument for the teleporter provides no logic beyond it. Here, I also declare “there is no teleporter paradox”. Are you convinced? A mere contradiction does not imply a paradox. Other than that, we already have the exact situation you describe: a twin on the crime scene will leave the exact genetic information. Does that mean there is a paradox? No. Does that mean it has to be the same person? No. It’s two different conscious entities that happen to have the same DNA. Just like a copied person. No problem, no contradiction, no paradox.
- jodrellblank 5y ago
  If a unicorn farted to create rainbows, my ability to see rainbows could still be based on their refracting of light. Both could be true simultaneously and not contradict each other. If the criminal is honest and wants to admit their crime, the Twins scenario will result in one denying the crime and one admitting it, correctly. If you imprison them both it would be unjust for one of them. If you imprison one of them and the other goes free, no injustice is done. If one human did the shooting, stepped into the teleporter, now two humans are honestly admitting to it, what do you do? If you imprison only one of them - one shooter, one person in prison - is that justice? If so, which one do you imprison and why? The other one experiences comitting a shooting and admitting to it and walking free unpunished, that doesn't seem right. If you imprison them both, then you must at some level agree they are both the same person who pulled the trigger, yes? If you don't agree they are both the same person who pulled the trigger and both need punishing, which one isn't and what's the difference about that one?