In fact, a "regular" clone is a baby with your DNA. It has no memories yet, no personality, nothing but the same genes as you. (And even this could be changed, with genetic modification - cf Lorelei Lee Long and Lapis Lazuli Long, clone-daughters of Lazarus Long in Time Enough For Love.)
A "transporter clone", should such a thing exist, would be utterly indistinguishable from the original - would in fact be exactly the same person.
"The meaning of victory is not to merely defeat your enemy but to destroy him, to completely eradicate him from living memory, to leave no remnant of his endeavours, to crush utterly his achievement and remove from all record his every trace of existence. From that defeat no enemy can ever recover. That is the meaning of victory."
-Lord Commander Solar Macharius
I really shouldn't entertain the OP, but the clone remark riled me up a little...
What is it with people being disturbed by the prospect of clones? If we follow the transporter example of a clone, the clone has your genetic code, your memories, your body. For all intents and purposes, it is you. Why is a clone less valuable than the original person? If we believe in the soul and in God (as I do), then surely God would guide the soul to this duplicated body so we could continue our natural* life.
And in regards to 'regular' clones... Why is a regular clone somehow a bad thing? Again, it has your body, memories, etc. It is you. As far as the clone knows, it has always been you. It's not the clone's fault for existing, anymore than it's a child's fault for being born. As Odo said "killing your clone is still murder!"
*As natural as our lives are now. Are people who are resuscitated soulless? After all, the did die.
The prospect of a clone isn't disturbing. What's scary about the thought is that the clone is not you. When you step in the transporter your life ends, "you" do not reach the new destination. The clone continues your life, believing it is you but "you" are gone. I won't go into the part where God guides a soul to the new body.
However, the way Star Trek technology is described in canon and in reference material directly related to it the transported person doesn't die. It's a transporter, not a replicator, as was pointed you earlier. The only thing that's curious is the creation of Thomas Riker and that is explained via Treknobabble. Usually the transported is guided through a transporter "beam" to get from point A to point B. In "Second Chances" the Potemkin had to use two "beams" to overcome some interference, but only one beam reached it's destination, the other got stuck in the "buffers". So this is not how a transporter usually works, it's a freak accident and by what we learn not reproduceable.
Whatever theories there are in RL for transporter technology, for Star Trek it's not true and thus nobody dies while being transported
^ Memory Alpha.org is not canon. It's a open wiki with arbitrary rules. Only what can be cited from an episode is. ^
"No. Men do not roar. Women roar. Then they hurl heavy objects... and claw at you." -Worf, son of Mogh
"A filthy, mangy beast, but in its bony breast beat the heart of a warrior" - "faithful" (...) "but ever-ready to follow the call of the wild." - Martok, about a Targ
"That pig smelled horrid. A sweet-sour, extremely pungent odor. I showered and showered, and it took me a week to get rid of it!" - Robert Justman, appreciating Emmy-Lou
Comments
A "transporter clone", should such a thing exist, would be utterly indistinguishable from the original - would in fact be exactly the same person.
-Lord Commander Solar Macharius
The prospect of a clone isn't disturbing. What's scary about the thought is that the clone is not you. When you step in the transporter your life ends, "you" do not reach the new destination. The clone continues your life, believing it is you but "you" are gone. I won't go into the part where God guides a soul to the new body.
However, the way Star Trek technology is described in canon and in reference material directly related to it the transported person doesn't die. It's a transporter, not a replicator, as was pointed you earlier. The only thing that's curious is the creation of Thomas Riker and that is explained via Treknobabble. Usually the transported is guided through a transporter "beam" to get from point A to point B. In "Second Chances" the Potemkin had to use two "beams" to overcome some interference, but only one beam reached it's destination, the other got stuck in the "buffers". So this is not how a transporter usually works, it's a freak accident and by what we learn not reproduceable.
Whatever theories there are in RL for transporter technology, for Star Trek it's not true and thus nobody dies while being transported
Get the Forums Enhancement Extension!