5 ms·
One key difference is that we know brains can exist. We might not know the entirety of how they work, but the important thing is we already know they can be rep
by TheCraiggers 13y ago
One key difference is that we know brains can exist. We might not know the entirety of how they work, but the important thing is we already know they can be reproduced in some fashion.
Hyperdrive or any other form of FTL travel is purely in our thoughts. Nothing currently exists that even proves it is possible in our current reality. For all we know we could spend an infinite time attempting it and never achieve it.
- mitchty 13y agoTrue, however a key distinction i'm making here is knowing something exists and knowing how it works and being able to replicate that in another system could be just as much of an infinite timesink. I'd rephrase the "nothing currently exists that even proves it is possible" to, nothing has been observed to demonstrate its possibility. That and things like warping space could throw a wrench into the "we can't travel faster than light". But maybe we can end run around it. Though the same can be said of the brain, we really know we don't know a lot more than what we don't know about physics.
- snowwrestler 13y agoWe have no evidence at all that a given brain can be reproduced. We know that new brains can be made and developed (i.e. procreation), and even then we don't really know how that works. But the post above said "mind" not "brain" which typically signifies that the author draws some sort of distinction between the two. I'm just saying: I don't know of any physical evidence for that distinction.