• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account
L onge C ity       Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans


Adverts help to support the work of this non-profit organisation. To go ad-free join as a Member.


Photo
- - - - -

The words of a friend.


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 thanatos

  • Guest
  • 19 posts
  • 0
  • Location:New York

Posted 05 February 2005 - 01:34 AM


A friend of mine says he has disproved all ways of immortality and he wont listen when I try to say he's wrong! He says that "eternal life is impossible because the human body will not adapt fast enough,also it would wither away with age,also heart injuries and other desiese would kill the human not very long after they are about 70" and that if you try some form of reincarnation then "the brain is what ur main sequence is...if the brain dies,u die and from enough stress of death and age,it will soon die". Is what he says true? I mean there must be some way to get past all of these things with science eventually.

#2 Infernity

  • Guest
  • 3,322 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Israel (originally from Amsterdam, Holland)

Posted 05 February 2005 - 09:49 AM

Thanatos, If it wasn't possible to overtake death- than what the hell are we doing here? I mean of course it is possible! my motto is:
NOTHING is for sure, but EVERYTHING is possible!
Which bring me to my second motto:
The hard shall be done today, and the impossible shall be done tomorrow...
Thanatos, I found you a young fellow, almost like me.
Welcome here, I definitely managed to learn alot while being a member over here.
Don't ever doubt the power of the humankind, so far my two main mottos are seem to be true.
(My third motto is just a sort of a tip, goes like this: Sometimes silence is best, not because there is nothing to say, but because some things are just too deep for words...)

Yours truthfully
~Infernity

#3 thanatos

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 19 posts
  • 0
  • Location:New York

Posted 05 February 2005 - 06:23 PM

Alright infernity, I agree with you and I like your mottos! ;)

#4 reason

  • Guardian Reason
  • 1,101 posts
  • 262
  • Location:US

Posted 05 February 2005 - 06:36 PM

The body is no different from a car in some respects; you will eventually be able to replace any of the component parts when they are damaged. This is fairly self-evident. The brain is a different case; here we must learn to repair it in situ - however, it is still an engine of component parts. At some point we will be able to replace each neuron or even subcomponent of a neuron as it falters. I don't think anyone is going to protest that the replacement or repair of a single neuron at a time is going to damage their selfhood.

The technologies to do this are not so outlandish that they cannot be envisaged. Organ transplants, regenerative medicine based on stem cells, cures for cancer, gene therapies, nanomedical robots. People have outlined the form of future technologies in all of these cases and are working on at least the preliminaries at the moment.

Reason
Founder, Longevity Meme
reason@longevitymeme.org
http://www.longevitymeme.org

#5 Infernity

  • Guest
  • 3,322 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Israel (originally from Amsterdam, Holland)

Posted 05 February 2005 - 06:42 PM

Alright infernity, I agree with you and I like your mottos! ;)

Glad you did Thanatos, now all that's left is to work out... ;)

~Infernity

#6 kraemahz

  • Guest
  • 157 posts
  • 0
  • Location:University of Washington

Posted 05 February 2005 - 10:13 PM

One of my favorite ideas on the forum is the thought experiment of the ship and the collector (found at the start of the "What constitutes 'me'?" thread). It shows that an object is not a sum of its parts, but composed of two things: continuity of experience and pattern. Thus, a human needs not remain composed of their original parts to remain themselves and at the same time those original parts are no longer part of the individual once removed. If you were replaced cell by cell, and your original cells were collected together into a mass that did not retain any pattern I doubt there would be anyone who would call that mass human. Failing mechanisms can be replaced and it need not be with cells. A slow transfer from in vivo to in silico would render a person no less themselves than a transfer from cell to cell as long as they retained their continuity and basic pattern, and for that matter pattern is mutable as well as long as the process is slow and taken in steps. You do not retain the same specific pattern from childhood to adulthood but you are still essentially the same person. It's this change that makes a person dynamic. So, the essence of this is: no human must remain biological to remain human.

As Reason described, there are dozens of sciences all in the works to make such a thing possible. Nothing happens unless it is attempted, even if we were all lost in the persuit of immortality would you believe it to be a wasted life? So what if something seems difficult? To never try out of discouragement is the same thing as giving up. Life is far too important to give up completely on the offchance that you may fail, because most certainly doing nothing is failure.

#7 thanatos

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 19 posts
  • 0
  • Location:New York

Posted 06 February 2005 - 12:54 AM

What if you were to replace your body cell by cell with special comuterized cells that were programmed to do special things like cover your body with armor as tough as steel and it was as easy as moving your fingers. Imagine the possibilities.

#8 kraemahz

  • Guest
  • 157 posts
  • 0
  • Location:University of Washington

Posted 06 February 2005 - 02:12 AM

What if you were to replace your body cell by cell with special comuterized cells that were programmed to do special things like cover your body with armor as tough as steel and it was as easy as moving your fingers. Imagine the possibilities.

Yes, to a degree that is what I (and many of us here) think of. However, as much as we'd all like to have psuedo-magical powers there are limits to what can be done. Settling for no longer being vulnerable to the ravages of our own biology would be enough for most. The solution, however, might to some be considered questionable or downright unfathomable: I'm speaking of course of 'uploading.' It's not a concept unique to transhumanism by any means: a human mind in a machine is a plot device in many, many scifi shows (an episode of Stargate SG-1, Ghost in the Shell, and an episode of Batman Beyond, to name a few in recent memory), but I'm convinced that slow replacement is the only way it is actually possible. The kind of change in substrait is so dramatic that there is no way to 'copy' a mind onto a machine.

Wetware (the brain) is a tightly bound combination of the influences of software and hardware, to change that configuration to something completely software-based is a major step. There are many methods to describe how this might work, but only something that moved so slowly as to change only a tiny portion or a single cell of the brain at a time would be sufficient to allow adaption without killing the person. To do it in one huge step you will have essentially killed the person and replaced them with copy, because it doesn't fulfill the requirement of continuity. Even if the copy is perfect in pattern, there exists no soul in a body to transfer instantly from one form to another across the separating space.

My favored idea of how to do this (because I thought of it first and then later found it had already been discussed on the net, drat [tung]) would be to fill the brain with nanomachines with the mission of observing neurons. Once a nanomachine had completely and assuridly determined it could mimic all the functions of the single neuron it kills it and takes its place. Meanwhile, via radio it is sending up all the signals that it is recieving and outputing and slowly the replaced neurons form a communication with an outside machine. The transition is that eventually the person's conciousness is expanded to include both their replaced brain and the machine, their mind existing in both stratum at once. The line continues to blur until finally a point is reached at which the initial components of the mind are now secondary to the function of the concious mind, and the original body is no longer necessary for a person to think. It's sort of like first turning your mind into a 'hard drive', networking it with another 'hard drive' and then running your 'program' simultaniously on both of them while you're coping it over.

#9 thanatos

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 19 posts
  • 0
  • Location:New York

Posted 06 February 2005 - 02:26 AM

I think thats a very good idea but if thats what was needed for immortality wouldn't that take a very long time? I mean I dont think you can plan to have somthing as complex as the human brain linked up to a computer in a day in fact I would expect it would take well over a year...but who knows with all these technological advances going on constantly maybe by then it will only take a few hours.

#10 Infernity

  • Guest
  • 3,322 posts
  • 11
  • Location:Israel (originally from Amsterdam, Holland)

Posted 06 February 2005 - 04:16 AM

Thanatos, not hours, but yearS... In my opinion.

~Infernity

Edited by infernity, 06 February 2005 - 03:32 PM.


#11 Cyto

  • Guest
  • 1,096 posts
  • 1

Posted 06 February 2005 - 05:41 AM

A friend of mine says he has disproved all ways of immortality and he wont listen when I try to say he's wrong!


Nice person. [hmm]

Obviously has no idea what is going on.

#12 olaf.larsson

  • Guest
  • 583 posts
  • 21
  • Location:Sweden

Posted 06 February 2005 - 04:04 PM

In the 1940-ies people who dreamed about space travel were considered insane. In 1969 the first person walken on the moon. There are very many similar examples in the history where impossible things become reallity much sooner than anyone have expected. The knowledge of this makes me feel really good. Ofcourse we must be called crazy by some, there is no other possibility.

#13 thanatos

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 19 posts
  • 0
  • Location:New York

Posted 06 February 2005 - 05:26 PM

Yeah you're right wolfram, I cant wait to prove them wrong.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users