How much memory would we need to represent a human? How would each atom be stored as? Bytes? Something more complex?
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
10
-
2$\begingroup$ As currently worded, this is close to being off topic, since it deals with a clearly fictional technology which will never exist. Physics can answer "what is the information content of a human being?" but not "could this be submitted to a respawning machine?" BTW, there are something like $10^{27}$ or $10^{28}$ atoms in your body, not $2\times10^9$. $\endgroup$– user10851Commented Feb 10, 2013 at 22:48
-
1$\begingroup$ I'm with Chris on this, the wording needs work to get at the on-topic question in there. $\endgroup$– dmckee --- ex-moderator kittenCommented Feb 10, 2013 at 22:58
-
4$\begingroup$ Uh... "if each atom was considered one byte in terms of memory?" Why this particular prior assumption? It kind of defeats the whole purpose of the question, and coverts it into a simple counting exercise which has already been answered in the comments. $\endgroup$– dmckee --- ex-moderator kittenCommented Feb 11, 2013 at 0:55
-
2$\begingroup$ Plus, it would take rather more than one byte to represent the position and state of each atom accurately enough. I would suggest changing the wording to something like "how much memory would it take to represent a human, in high enough resolution that the person could, in principle, be reconstructed from the data and remain alive." Then it becomes an interesting and highly non-trivial question (to which I can probably give a reasonable answer). The "in principle" is important because it doesn't imply the existence of the probably-impossible machine required to actually do it. $\endgroup$– N. VirgoCommented Feb 11, 2013 at 1:22
-
2$\begingroup$ @Nathaniel But what fidelity would the copy have to have to count as the same person? Perfect copying is impossible due to quantum no-cloning, and poor copying is obviously... problematic. So you have to draw a line somewhere. Where? That is, to me, a very interesting and difficult question in its own right. Yet surely it has a huge impact on an answer to the OP's question. $\endgroup$– MichaelCommented Feb 11, 2013 at 6:33
|
Show 5 more comments
1 Answer
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
1
According to the Wikipedia page on orders of magnitude (data), 2 * 10$^{45}$ bits of information are required to perfectly recreate the average-sized adult male down to the quantum level on a computer.
-
$\begingroup$ This is calculated from the Bekenstein bound $\endgroup$– endolithCommented May 5, 2013 at 23:05