EVE Fiction

Forum Index

EVE Forums » EVE Communication Center » EVE Fiction » Topic on the books, lore and alts

Topic is locked indefinitely.

Topic on the books, lore and alts
Author

Previous Topic Next Topic

Lyell Wolf

Federal Navy Academy

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 52

#1 - 2012-10-04 01:57:48 UTC | Edited by: Lyell Wolf

I've been attmpting to, more or less, find proof in our capabilities to have alts in New Eden, or being able to control two individuals at once with one mind. (Stay with me on this.)

So, I took a quick stop in the RP forums and posted a question reguarding this. I was kindly given an answer that reminded me of an instance where Sansha Kuvakei (No source) was seen speaking through another body.

Now, (If I have'nt lost you yet), this may be more than enough reason for me to "explain" how we can use alts from a lore perspective. Of course, I only bring the topic up because I want to justify the ability to use an alt from a RP perspective. But I did find the topic very interesting and perhaps it's worth a thought. I did enjoy the, all together, 10 minutes of searching for an answer.

Edit: The (no source) is for spoiler protection. Not that it's really a spoiler, but I really don't want to open a can of snakes.

David Forge

GameOn Inc.

Likes received: 173

#2 - 2012-10-04 04:55:39 UTC

The Sansha example you reference is more easily explained by Sansha's extremely advanced control of cybernetically augmented humans. The subject was less likely a good IC explanation for an alt and more likely an example of Sansha using an augmented human as a speaker/microphone/video system. The idea is so simple, given general cybernetic advancement, that such capabilities are probably well within the grasp of Empire technology. The only qualms would be ones of ethics or the utility of such an arrangement for more than dramatic effect.

If you wanted to look into possible explanations of alts in the fiction I would suggest instead using the Broker as a starting point.

Lyell Wolf

Federal Navy Academy

Gallente Federation

Likes received: 52

#3 - 2012-10-04 08:53:21 UTC | Edited by: Lyell Wolf

The Broker was actually my first choice as an example. However, I never saw any evidence supporting the idea he was more than one person at a time.

As to the ethics regarding this, my idea is simple. Much like I would commission a jump clone to be created, I would commission a "empty" body to be made that had a similar neurological mapping as my own. It would make the control of two minds much easier. Also, there should be minimal ethical issues since the body was never "alive" to begin with.

However, for reasons we do not know, the transference of knowledge between the two minds is impossible. Such as the ability to fly certain ships. This can be explained that perhaps for a mind to retain any knowledge, it must first have something that can right the information to it. Much like how a hard drive would work. The mind, the data disk, and the device writing info onto it, the conciousness.

Borascus

Likes received: 654

#4 - 2012-10-04 09:45:59 UTC | Edited by: Borascus

Identical twins have long been purported as having similar thoughts about experiences and even emotions in sympatico, with the fringe saying they can even hear each other think, when they see something.

However, the science behind multiple personality holds that each personality element is contained within the brain.

From that you can facilitate the use of 2 clones, separate or otherwise. If you learn two behaviours simultaneously before grabbing a brainscan, your alt would be able to become your satellite, working in sympatico with your intentions, even as far as co-ordinated behaviours.

In this respect you can pull back to the singular and determine that if you had two things you needed to do at the exact same time, you would convince yourself to see your double internally (a clone later) and discuss that one does a. the other does b. then instruct yourself to rely on a coin toss with a selection of A or B, to be used when you meet your clone to assign the behaviours to one form.

When the coin is flipped one person or its clone has been given a side, and each behaviour has been allocated to either side. Such that behaviour X is ascribed to A and behaviour Y is assigned to B. The coin toss removes the possessive.

Part of chioce relates to the 4 options available; Good for me and good for everybody, good for me || Good for everybody except me, good for neither me nor anybody else.

This allows the choices to have sacrificial and heroic qualities, and this scales into a full spectra of outcomes available to anyone at any time, based on the common denomination of expected outcome.

From this; there is no way having a second incarnation is blocked. If you can transfer every single neuron (representing the biological memory, fluid-intelligence type and crystalline intelligence) into a duplicate.

Only one problem arises; if both are set on an outcome, no experience will convince either that the plan is flawed, as survival instincts sacrifice the other in all extended evaluations, the survivor would simply start again from there (original form or clone).

That and classing the primary behaviour before the coin toss and sacrificing the memory of the other as irrelevant to the self.


David Forge GameOn Inc. Likes received: 173	#5 - 2012-10-04 17:36:47 UTC 2 I believe the Broker did have multiple instances of himself operating at any given time, I'm pretty sure it was in the Empyrean Age.