38 replies to this topic

[Herb Elwood III]

Hello Imminsters!

Sadly, I have proven that a real life matrix/brain-in-a-vat scenario is impossible with the current paradigm of technology. A brain in the vat scenario, sold in a way similar to the Alcor Life Extension technology, would provide the central nervous system a way to survive much longer than the mortal body allows.

Using the classic Brain in the Vat scenario, and comparing this "blueprint" to current research, I was able to determine that such a technology could be feasibly built using common materials and recent advances in medical technologies. The main issues with the upkeep and maintenance of a brain vat are typically power consumption (to run heater, monitor, dialysis and artificial circulatory system components), and the fact that such a brain/vat technology would require a constant supply of oxygenated blood, recycled and filtered, as well as a constant supply of nutrients through intravenous delivery.

Currently, a company offers synthetic Plasma. This is an advancement, but one that is not adequate for a complete artificial circulatory system.

Cheers [glasses]
-h

[Herb Elwood III]

Attached is notes of a presentation of findings related to BCI, neuroscience and cognition experiments, which relate to such a topic.

Attached Files

•  presentation.txt   31.48KB   93 downloads

Edited by herb, 10 October 2005 - 02:41 PM.

[bgwowk]

By the time you get that through the FDA, James Bedford will be revived from cryopreservation.

---BrianW

[John Schloendorn]

What exactly makes you think that a living brain in a vat would not eventually get Alzeimers, accumulate mitochondrial mutations, ect. and die just like it would on top of a body? Are there any results that would actually suggest so?

[Herb Elwood III]

Not everyone gets Alzheimers or other diseases. It is very possible that a correctly balanced nutritional plan would help a healthy brain avoid such diseases. My 87 year old grandmother, for instance, has no neurological diseases or any symptoms of those diseases. Alzhiemers and Parkinsons carriers would not be qualified candidates for such a device.

According to some studies, the brain can live up to 65 years longer than a normal human body would allow. Thus, a 150 year old brain is not something that would be that improbable, and might be more of a norm. Some studies claim the brain could live up to 200 years longer than the body allows.

[Herb Elwood III]

The FDA would not have much to do with it. It's more of an AMA issue. For those of us who do business in other countries for medical purposes, such as the "Botox party" thing, it might be possible to store such devices offshore. There is also the chance that such a device would be looked at as a volunteer procedure, and would not be regulated in the same way that an involuntary, required medical procedure would be. Similar to plastic surgery, which is considered a commercial industry and is not regulated in the same way. Since anyone may volunteer for research, it could be commercialized. I'm not 100% sure on this, but from reading the law and examining the way these organizations categorize medical procedure, it's possible. Certainly in Venezuela if not here.

Edited by herb, 10 October 2005 - 02:49 PM.

[John Schloendorn]

Not everyone gets Alzheimers or other diseases

True, but the probability to get it increases with age. It could be that a common mechanism to escape neurodegeneration is to die of something else first, while you would certainly get it at some point if you didn't die of anything else.

According to some studies

Sorry, what I was trying to ask was: Which studies?

[bgwowk]

Seriously, this idea cannot be done with near-term technology. There isn't even a workable artificial liver yet. Get an intensive care physician who says it can be done, and then I'll believe that maybe a $100 millionaire might be able to do it in a third world country without medical regulation.

---BrianW

[Herb Elwood III]

I don't think so. I think it can be built for far less money than you are speculating. I also believe that it shouldn't be produced until we have an adequate blood supply.

I would also like to add that Alzheimers is genetic and its symptoms increase with age, as is Parkinsons. Due to the extremely costly nature of genetic mapping, it is difficult to detect those diseases.

Also, those are niche markets, most people die from lung cancer and heart attacks.

[John Schloendorn]

Herb,
I am not asking for studies in order to prove you wrong, I am asking because I am truly interested in this type of work. Please provide me with any reference you might have, even if it does not quite echo your bold statements. You are welcome to respond by PM if you wish.

[Herb Elwood III]

Oh there is no emotion in science. That's what makes it logical and reasonable. Different studies report different things, biased by different testing and data collection methods, etc. I suggest using Google Scholar. There are a host of studies which report different things. If you think about hospitals, you can see that such a device, given an adequate replenishing blood supply (one purchased through a supplier, hopefully not through the communal supply) could be built the size of a room with today's technology. It would cost between $150000-$200000 to construct the device from a variety of parts, and might cost somewhere in the range of $500000 to keep it going for a decade. It probably would consume between $40-60 worth of AC/DC current, and about $1500 worth of medical supplies monthly, but I haven't fully researched the pricing and cost yet, I will be doing this next week.

[Herb Elwood III]

Here's a copy of a rough sketch in JPG format

---

(edit bycaliban: picture scale and orientation)

Attached Files

•  pthinkingdevice.jpg   32.97KB   48 downloads

[Herb Elwood III]

For more information see "Perpetual Thinking Device" topic in the "introduce yourself" part of this online forum. Your answers will be used for marketing research to determine the sustainability of a firm that would offer this as an alternative or adjunct to Cryonic suspension.

[Herb Elwood III]

Please see the poll in "Brain-Computer Interface" forum regarding this.

[bgwowk]

This scheme is totally ridiculous with current technology. Once again, herb, if patients today cannot be kept alive when EVERYTHING is working normally except the liver, why do you presume you can dispense with every organ in the body including the liver? Same notation with respect to heart and lungs, without without which life support is only possible for hours or days at best. How is your patient going to be fed? How are wastes going to be processed (to think waste processing consists solely of dialysis is naive)? How is homeostasis going to be maintained?

What are your medical credentials anyway?

---BrianW

[bgwowk]

The credibility of this with present technology is somewhere between cryonics by straight freezing and Alex Chiu. Probably closer to Alex Chiu. See my comments in the other thread.

---BrianW

[Infernity]

Um,
"No, I want to die naturally." -
What's a natural death?...........


-Infernity

[bgwowk]

Let me further add that even if this were made to work for a short time, without a highly sophisticated virtual reality neural interface (not invented yet), this condition is the equivalent of lock-in syndrome. Lock-in syndrome is a medical nightmare in which patients are conscious but totally unable to move or communicate any discomfort with the outside world. Most sane people would rather die than be in such a state for an hour, let alone years.

---BrianW

[bgwowk]

Let me further add that even if this were made to work for a short time, without a highly sophisticated virtual reality neural interface (not invented yet), this condition is the equivalent of lock-in syndrome. Lock-in syndrome is a medical nightmare in which patients are conscious but totally unable to move or communicate any discomfort with the outside world. Most sane people would rather die than be in such a state for an hour, let alone years.

---BrianW

[John Schloendorn]

Does that mean up to 150 years total life span including my "natural" one or is it plus another 150? (I think difference would matter a lot in terms of escape velocity.)

[Herb Elwood III]

say your normal lifespan is 80-120 years. this would add 60-150 years. i think there is an optimal setting for the IVDS (intravenous delivery system) that would extend brain function to an optimal level. hospitals aren't really interested in this, but i think its a feasible technology.

[Herb Elwood III]

dying naturally is defined here as death without drugs, hospital or otherwise, ie: killed instantly in an accident or conflict, or dying while you are sleeping during old age, or from a terminal illness, without the aid of modern medical science

[Herb Elwood III]

Did you take a look at "presentation.txt"? It includes links to relatively advanced BCI research and a lot of information on neuroscience.

There are some technologies such as nanomesh which may provide extremely high fidelity electrode interfaces.

This "electrode nanomesh" could become a two-way tissue-like machine interface, providing both artificial stimulation and high-fidelity recording of brainwave activity.

An artificial, nutrigenated circulatory system would be sustainable given an ample supply of consituent chemicals to an optimized heterogenous mixture of nutrients and oxygenated oxygen-carrying carbon nanites.

Existing synthetic plasma and synthetic blood companies could contribute to communal supply for a group of "brain vats" stored in a communal warehouse facility.

The software side of such a device would involve signal processing, artificial stimulation features and a way of teleoperating robotic prosthesis for real-world interaction.

Currently "computer vision" and "sight replacement" technologies (which go by a variety of names) include low-resolution visuals. The improvement of this software and interface is an ongoing effort.

Current brain-computer interface technology provides though-provoked actions on a screen including 1-2 dimensional movement by "thinking" finger movements. It may be possible to train the brain to think like a puppeteer for controlling complex organic-inspired robotic forms, either remotely, or by directly interfacing with the 'brain vat'.

A small number of studies show a wide range of possible "increased lifespans" for the central nervous system; some claiming that the brain can live 60-200 years longer than the body can sustain it.

[Herb Elwood III]

OTHERS: Please answer the poll questions under topic "Brain Computer Interface" in this forum regarding this technology.

[Herb Elwood III]

The brain needs only oxygenated blood and a constant supply of recycled CSF, which is a fluid that the brain produces and recycles itself. The system is electro-chemical in nature and can be manipulated using carbon nanites. With an artificial circulatory system, the brain and spinal column can function autonomously.

[bgwowk]

An artificial, nutrigenated circulatory system would be sustainable given an ample supply of consituent chemicals to an optimized heterogenous mixture of nutrients and oxygenated oxygen-carrying carbon nanites.

Perhaps in 2105 when people are already routinely living forever. This technology is nowhere near feasible yet, or affordable if it were.

And if it could be done, why would you throw away natural sensory/motor apparatus: sight, hearing, and speech? In other words, why wouldn't you sustain the whole head to at least give the same quality of life as a quadriplegic? If your answer is that your electronic net will provide a richer experience, there's no point even discussing it until that technology is available for quadriplegics. Or to bring normal sight to the blind, for that matter.

The technologies needed for this scheme are still decades in the future, with the need for the scheme decreasing with every year that goes by as life extension by better means becomes more and more feasible. I predict the only future need for "brain in a vat" will be temporary maintenance during trauma repair. Even then, the maintenance apparatus will be more biological than the low-tech clunky mechanical contrivances you describe.

Which brings me to my final point. The best way to subsitute the functions of vital organs is with REAL organs. Therefore the best and most economical way to sustain brains and heads is with a REAL body. That's something that coule be done with present technology. Surgeon Robert White spent his life perfecting body transplants in animal models, but sadly died before he was able to try one on a human patient. There's another thread somewhere on Imminst that was discussing this, which is the closest thing to a practically realizable version of your scheme.

---BrianW

Edited by bgwowk, 24 October 2005 - 05:27 PM.

[Herb Elwood III]

Not entirely; many hospital devices could be used that are in existence now such as a dialysis and heart lung machine. Building a vat is not hard- it could be done out of specialized glass or plastics. A BCI would work, but the visual element of synthetic sight is in its infancy, yet only a few years old. They even have a visual synthesis medical device which goes on your tongue (non invasive). The BCI research done at the NY State Institute of Health is good. 2105 is a bit far off; considering the advancements in nanofabrication we make each year, it could be a reality in 10-15 years.

[Herb Elwood III]

By the way, a 128 electrode BCI is approximately $2000, a heart/lung machine about $40000, a dialysis machine $12000 (used) -- it would have a monthly upkeep cost of $1000-1500 in IV and the biggest issue with feasibility is the lack of synthetic blood (though there is already synthetic plasma).

So, for the cost of freezing your whole body with Cryonics, you could be put in a vat and kept alive.

[bgwowk]

Herb, for the umpteenth time, a heart-lung machine and dialysis machine are not sufficient for long-term life support!

Sheeeesh.

----BrianW

[caliban]

Navigation: This is a discussion of a specific idea rather than a personal introduction. Somewhat belatedly the thread has been merged with its sister to avoid further duplication.

Herb: Welcome to ImmInst! I think you are on to something, but I agree with bgwowk that extracting the brain is probably not desirable. Why waste the existing sensory apparatus and blood supply? Machines are expensive and unreliable.

Why not look some more into whole body transplantation?