Avatar

[GeneticJen]

Derail of the century by the way!

[Elessarina]

Totally different thing. Their matter wasn't deconstructed! When you are de-fibbed, nobody is creating an identical copy of you anywhere.

Neither are they in Star Trek, they and converting your matter to energy and reassembling it somewhere else.

That does happen actually to Riker in the Next Gen..

I've not seen that. So was he actually two people, in that he controlled both bodies simultaneously (which is what would happen if you are right) or were they both independent beings but both feeling they were genuinely Riker (which is what would really happen)?{/quote]

He was two different people but it was a transporter accident caused by unique circumstances. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Cha ... eneration))

[quote}
The only way you are going to be transported somewhere and have it actually be YOU, is if you literally get transported there. For sci-fi distances, Alien presents a realistic option. And if you know people working on teleportation experiments, bring this up with them! And involve some neurologists if you know any of them. [/quote]

As I said I understand the REAL science behind transporter technology and that in reality you would be creating a duplicate.. you don't have to keep labouring the point, however I do not believe this *is* the case in Star Trek I think in Trek the technology converts you to energy and sends you as energy to a different location where you are reassembled right down to the contents of your stomach.. and there is no death involved... although according to something i read about the technology in Trek there is some debate. Anyway I don't want to get into an argument about it

[GeneticJen]

Totally different thing. Their matter wasn't deconstructed! When you are de-fibbed, nobody is creating an identical copy of you anywhere.

Neither are they in Star Trek, they and converting your matter to energy and reassembling it somewhere else.

If they are reassembling it, then it was disassembled at some point. That would mean your life ended. Not the same as coming back when de-fibbed.

I don't want to argue either. It seems we agree on most of it, but disagree that Star Trek's exact method is the same as what we were originally discussing. I think it is. But who cares.

To get back on topic a little, do you think this will be catapult Sam Worthington to the top of the industry as an action hero? Salvation was promised to do just that, and he has become more well-known, but he's hardly a household name yet.

Will this do it, despite him being CGI most of the film?

[Elessarina]

If they are reassembling it, then it was disassembled at some point. That would mean your life ended. Not the same as coming back when de-fibbed.

Sorry but I disagree because unless you can define EXACTLY what causes a life to end then you cannot judge if de materialisation actually ends life

get back on topic a little, do you think this will be catapult Sam Worthington to the top of the industry as an action hero? Salvation was promised to do just that, and he has become more well-known, but he's hardly a household name yet.

Well he did Terminator 4 and already has the Clash of the Titans gig so who knows.. but it's been a pretty good couple of years for him

this do it, despite him being CGI most of the film?

I doubt it would make a difference as the CGi performances are so intense etc I don't think this would in any way affect his popularity based on this film. Look at how Andy Serkis came out of LoTR

[Rum]

Well I have now seen the trailer and I must say it has raised my hopes and expectations! Looks fabulous!

[Elessarina]

Well I have now seen the trailer and I must say it has raised my hopes and expectations! Looks fabulous!

You should have seen the 3D footage I saw!

[Xamonas Chegwé]

re. the transporter conunddrums. There is an excellent article on this (along with much other speculation on the scientific nature of the soul and identity) in The Mind's I. Thoroughly recommended.

[Transgirlofnofaith]

Regarding the transportation thing, It hinges on a philosophical conundrum that no-one has yet solved. It all depends on how you define "originality". Would a copy of me down to the last quark still be me? In my opinion, yes. Would I mind something happening to my original self? Of course. But that's an emotional reaction. If you could create unlimited copies of yourself indefinitely, you would in effect be immortal. As a question, would those human-type cylons who downloaded their consciousness into a new copy be the same individuals, if you would consider them people? Someone fetch Cali for this.

[GeneticJen]

Regarding the transportation thing, It hinges on a philosophical conundrum that no-one has yet solved. It all depends on how you define "originality". Would a copy of me down to the last quark still be me? In my opinion, yes. Would I mind something happening to my original self? Of course. But that's an emotional reaction. If you could create unlimited copies of yourself indefinitely, you would in effect be immortal. As a question, would those human-type cylons who downloaded their consciousness into a new copy be the same individuals, if you would consider them people? Someone fetch Cali for this.

It would still be you? OK, so if we created two copies then instead of one, "down to the last quark", would you now simultaneously be two people? I contend that both copies would feel as if they have always existed, and that the original is dead. Are you suggesting that the one consciousness would then exist as two separate bodies? You, would actually be two people?

It's highly improbable, but what if technology was created that could make the copy without having to destroy the original? As in, the technology could read every quark rather than actually break the entire body down. According to me, you would exist, and at the other end there would be an exact copy of you. According to your argument, you would now simultaneously be and control two people. Minus souls, I don't understand how this works. If you die, do you jump to your other body or something?

[GeneticJen]

Empire (film magazine in the UK) has Avatar as the front-cover feature. Good read, makes me want to see the film even more.

[Trolldor]

Regarding the transportation thing, It hinges on a philosophical conundrum that no-one has yet solved. It all depends on how you define "originality". Would a copy of me down to the last quark still be me? In my opinion, yes. Would I mind something happening to my original self? Of course. But that's an emotional reaction. If you could create unlimited copies of yourself indefinitely, you would in effect be immortal. As a question, would those human-type cylons who downloaded their consciousness into a new copy be the same individuals, if you would consider them people? Someone fetch Cali for this.

It would still be you? OK, so if we created two copies then instead of one, "down to the last quark", would you now simultaneously be two people? I contend that both copies would feel as if they have always existed, and that the original is dead. Are you suggesting that the one consciousness would then exist as two separate bodies? You, would actually be two people?

It's highly improbable, but what if technology was created that could make the copy without having to destroy the original? As in, the technology could read every quark rather than actually break the entire body down. According to me, you would exist, and at the other end there would be an exact copy of you. According to your argument, you would now simultaneously be and control two people. Minus souls, I don't understand how this works. If you die, do you jump to your other body or something?

Nope.

It'd just be matter formed in to a human body that was a duplicate copy. It'd basically just be an identical twin.

[GeneticJen]

Agreed.

[aznxscorpion517]

I'm definitely excited to see it for the visuals and new technology since I'm a VFX (not VenomfangX!) student. However, I'm not all that impressed with the trailer. The film itself didn't stand out to me but I guess I shouldn't expect that much from the plot anyway. It doesn't seem to be an art house film anyway so what I expect from it is mostly just entertainment and entertainment is why I want to see it.

[Animavore]

Word on the street is that this film fucking rules.

[BrettA]

Word on the street is that this film fucking rules.

Producer Jon Landau showed about 30 minutes of it - estimated, but an astounding amount, I thought! - at the Adobe MAX conference on the LA Convention Center's 1000' screen at Nokia Theatre in the days immediately following the AAI 2009 Convention in Burbank. Indeed, it was pretty fucking awesome! Then he spent time talking about the Adobe products used. My only issue was that I don't have stereopsis so any 3D technology is useless for me and they're all worst than straight film because of the ghosting. Still, it seemed very well done and I'll rent it on DVD when available.

[I also dunno the real size of the Nokia screen, but it's the biggest sucker I've ever seen.]