[MUD-Dev] Re: Introductions and descriptions

[Derrick Jones]

On Fri, 12 Dec 1997 coder at ibm.net wrote:
> On 10/12/97 at 02:36 PM, Matt Chatterley <root at mpc.dyn.ml.org> said: >On
> Tue, 9 Dec 1997 coder at ibm.net wrote:
> >> On 19/11/97 at 09:19 AM, Matt Chatterley <root at mpc.dyn.ml.org> said: 
> 
> >> >There are also a number of shaky areas in
> >> >the theme (for instance, the way by which transporter technology
> >> >functions precludes the possibility of persons having a 'metaphysical
> >> >soul' in the sense often intended), least of all areas of technology
> >> >which cannot be explained.
> >> 
> >> Actually that bit is rather easy to rationalise given a metaphysical soul. 
> >> A few possibilities:
> 
> >Hmm, it is? I don't generally sortie into these areas; I'm a scientist
> >(more engineer) by nature, and tend to get confuddled by things I can't
> >grab hold of and test to destruction (or dismantle).
> 
> I'm a mathematician by background, and spent far too long with irrational
> amd complex numbers.

I'm educated as a scientist, and spent far too long with irrational and
complex people.

One way to envision the soul is to imagine sitting in a very distant place
(so distant that you are in effect removed from this world).  Now imagine
you have fomulated a way to control living creatures in this world, but
have no other influence upon it.  (Sort of the player being the soul of a
character on a mud.)  You have managed at the start of the game to send a
living creature to the gameworld, and may only control those creatures
that is in contact with a creature already controlled by you.  With this
model, you can do anything to the creatures without affecting the
controlling soul.  Also, once there are no creatures controlled by the
soul, the soul can no longer interact with the mudworld in any way.

> >>   -- The soul is extra-dimensional, and thus is not affected by the
> >> transporter.  The sould also keys to the identity of the body (take your
> >> pick of identifying characteristics) and there-by remains linked.
> 
> >Hmm, we are talking about stripping the body into component atoms, or
> >even subatomic particles here, though - whatever it is 'keyed' to would
> >be completely destroyed, and debating on how you view transporter
> >'theory' either moved to the destination, or actually never moved.
> 
> Ahh, but the soul is able to sense ot otherwise lock onto that "key".  Why
> assume that the recreation of that key elsewhere would not also be locked
> on to.  This parallels the several Star Trek comments that teleporting a
> person without dissassembling them (ie just duplicating their body at
> their target without removing their current body) is a very Bad Thing.

Actually a friend of mine owns a Trek Tech manual, and suposedly in Star
Trek, there is a matter stream as well as an informational stream in
transporting someone.  Therefore the actual matter composing the person is
sent when they are transported.  I'll remove my Spock Ears now.

Derrick