Tuesday, January 24, 2017

People vs. Jeremy



Can a Star Trek transporter be used as a legal defense?  


In order to restore balance to the nerdiness, Jeremy is following up yesterday's Star Wars themed Status with a Star Trek themed Status.  Very inclusive of you, Jeremy.  


Thank you.  

So, I recently "read" an audio book that started with a bit of a thought experiment.  It goes basically thus:  

You own an axe.  You use it for a while and the blade breaks.  So, you go to the local hardware store, buy a new blade, attach it to the handle, and you have a functional axe again.  Later on, after further use, the handle breaks.  So, you go to the local hardware store, buy a new handle, attach it to the blade, and you have a functional axe again.  The question is, do you have the same axe you started with?  

It's interesting, because as much as you have entirely new components to your axe, you could make the case that since the entire thing was never replaced at once, and there is constant continuity between your existing axe and the original axe that you never replaced your axe.  

The same question applies to people.  

See, Star Trek transporters work on the very simple scientific fact that matter and energy are interchangeable.  The idea is that the transporter takes an image of every atom and subatomic particle in your body (compensating for the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle by using the brilliant "Heisenberg Compensator"), and converts all of it to energy.  At this point in time, you no longer exist, which is part of why Dr. McCoy always hated the transporter.  The energy is then "beamed" down to the surface of the planet and the original image is rebuilt in its new location, atom by atom.  The resulting person is quite genuinely not the original person, but a presumably perfect reproduction of the person on the spaceship.  

So, can this be used as a legal defense?  "I didn't shoot that person with the phaser.  The person I was before I transported did it!  I'm just a recreation."  To my knowledge, this important legal concept has never been broached in the episodes of Star Trek I've watched.  It's important because...you know...it could happen some day...presumably around 46 years from April 5. 

Give or take.

No comments: