Replies

I hate to get nit-picky here, but if the original object A is destroyed in the process, replaced with a perfect copy, A', at the end, how can this be construed to be teleporting? While that difference may be academic when applied to fundamental particles, it still cannot be argued to transport the original A, but to duplicate A out of something else at another point.

There is nothing in the HUP or other theories that I am aware of that would contradict the concept of generating a unique 1 to 1 relationship that (in concept) could uniquely tag the original A, and I do not see how that tag could be transported to A'. Just because a given particle, C, has identical attributes to A, does not make it A. It leaves it C that is identical to A.

I can see arguments on the author's side of this for fundamental particles, but I think his extrapolation that it "proves" the concept of teleportation for complex systems, is false.

In my mind it comes down to the basic question of "if something is mathematically possible, is it necessarilly possible?" I have been wrestling with that one for awhile, but my sense of it is that the answer is "no". My strongest argument to date for my position has a ready example in the potential energy function, E=mgh, for gravitational fields. I have concluded that potential energy is nonsense, and the fact that a simple (and more complex) mathematical equation describes it well is an illusion made possible by incomplete understanding, much as Newton's laws are merely approximations and do not really describe reality.

The way I see it, and I'll use a complex object as example is that, what does it matter to a person that wants to "travel" to a civilization at the other side of the Milky Way if the information of himself is instantaneously recreated via quantum entanglement on that distant civilization? He didn't travel anywhere but for all he knows as he stands among the distant civilization is that he is really there and no longer here.