sleeping pod in sci-fi movies science is wrong

[spice756]

In sci-fi movies the old or sick go in a pod to freeze them than when society is advance wake them up and fix them.

One problem they do not say in the sci-fi movies they are dead in the pod!! There is no brain activity they are dead.

The heart stops and the brain stops.The better solution is take a persons brain out of person and put in robot than you will be alive for a very long time.

When society is advance you can make skin ,blood ,heart ,cells ,muscles , bone ,organs so on:lol::lol: take brain out of the robot and put in your person you made with out a brain.

If anyone has any other thoughts on immortality please say

[redguard2009]

There's nothing to suggest that transplanting a brain into an immortal robot body would lead to immortality. The brain itself is made up of the same sorts of cells which the rest of our mortal, organic bodies are made of, and likewise braincells naturally decay and stop reproducing. You'd die anyway, probably just as quickly.

There are different forms of "stasis". Cryogenic statis, "sleep statis", etc. dealing with either freezing the body (in such a special way as to not create crystalization of ice in cell tissue which ultimately kills cells and prevents thawing out and reviving), putting the body into a deep comatose-like state of hibernation (in which all bodily functions are slowed down to the point that they almost stop completely; the heart beats once every one or two minutes, brain activity is absolutely minimal and even hard to detect at all).

Interestingly there is a lifeform which can survive freezing. There are many stories, which may or may not be true, about seemingly ancient frogs being brought back to life. There are a variety of stories about miners and other people breaking open lumps of coal and rock and finding frogs inside which then revive and start hopping around (though they apparently usually die quite soon after). It has been scientifically documented that many amphibious frogs can survive being frozen absolutely solid as their bodies generate a sort of organic anti-freeze which prevents the formation of ice crystals; thus they can literally be frozen alive for months or even years at a time and then thawed at which point they will come "back alive".

But the basis of mortality of organic creatures is the fact that the cells which make up our bodies have a "limit" on the number of times they can duplicate/reproduce. As we grow we are constantly growing new cells which replace old ones. There comes a point where cells stop reproducing, or that reproduction becomes less and less perfect, which leads to cell degredation and eventual failure. So far (iirc) science has yet to explain why cells stop reproducing, let alone figure out how to make them continue to do so.

Likely, even if science does figure it out in our lifetimes, the cellular nature probably means that any technology for "immortality" or prolonged life probably won't be applicable to anyone living today, as it probably involves genome alteration at the reproduction level.

[lvl100]

There's nothing to suggest that transplanting a brain into an immortal robot body would lead to immortality. The brain itself is made up of the same sorts of cells which the rest of our mortal, organic bodies are made of, and likewise braincells naturally decay and stop reproducing. You'd die anyway, probably just as quickly.

Only the problem is that neurons, unlike the other cells, are not reproducing at all. You basically start life with a huge number of them and then you just keep loosing them during your life.
So yes, u`l live longer in a metal shell, but with a small procent of your neurons remained and declining, you will be one really stupid robot.

I think that keeping your brain in one piece will be a much harder challenge than the rest of the body. At least the others cells have the mechanisms of auto-reproduction which can be tweaked by genetics.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Personally, I'm attracted to the proposition of replacing my neurons with something considerably more durable, that or foregoing the whole messy business of having a body in the first place and existing entirely as a software simulation.

But needless to say, such things aren't going to happen soon.

[Black Dagger]

Personally, I'm attracted to the proposition of replacing my neurons with something considerably more durable, that or foregoing the whole messy business of having a body in the first place and existing entirely as a software simulation.

Why? Just to be immortal?

[534634634265]

i smell a troll:glare:
but i'll bite. there are several species of starfish and anemone that de-age. they literally can refresh themselves. if we could harness that somehow...

[piet11111]

Only the problem is that neurons, unlike the other cells, are not reproducing at all. You basically start life with a huge number of them and then you just keep loosing them during your life.
So yes, u`l live longer in a metal shell, but with a small procent of your neurons remained and declining, you will be one really stupid robot.

I think that keeping your brain in one piece will be a much harder challenge than the rest of the body. At least the others cells have the mechanisms of auto-reproduction which can be tweaked by genetics.

http://www.physorg.com/news148840268.html


The study, published today in The EMBO Journal, identified a set of proteins -- calpain and cortactin, which regulate and control the sprouting of neurons -- a mechanism known as neural plasticity.

and now that the mechanism that prevents the regrowth of neurons has been identified we can now figure out ways to alter this system to our benefit.

one problem down many more to go before immortality can be achieved.

[spice756]

There are different forms of "stasis". Cryogenic statis, "sleep statis", etc. dealing with either freezing the body (in such a special way as to not create crystalization of ice in cell tissue which ultimately kills cells and prevents thawing out and reviving), putting the body into a deep comatose-like state of hibernation (in which all bodily functions are slowed down to the point that they almost stop completely; the heart beats once every one or two minutes, brain activity is absolutely minimal and even hard to detect at all).


So you are saying one Cryogenic you are in a sleep state body functions are slowed ,the heart beats once every one or two minutes .low brain activity .

The other Cryogenic you are dead not in a comatose sleep ?

But both you have to freez the body and un-freez .


But the basis of mortality of organic creatures is the fact that the cells which make up our bodies have a "limit" on the number of times they can duplicate/reproduce. As we grow we are constantly growing new cells which replace old ones. There comes a point where cells stop reproducing, or that reproduction becomes less and less perfect, which leads to cell degredation and eventual failure. So far (iirc) science has yet to explain why cells stop reproducing, let alone figure out how to make them continue to do so

That is news I did not think organs and tissure do that.

Do all cells do that?

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Why? Just to be immortal?

Partly. There are many other advantages to a digital existance. Firstly, I would be able to travel anywhere via the Internet as fast as bandwidth would allow, and once fully downloaded inhabit any structure capable of supporting my software (robot body, local terminal/mainframe, vehicle, holographic projector, and so on) - meaning I could go almost anywhere in the world as easily as meatbags visit websites.

As well as being able to travel around the real world at the speed of light, I would be able to explore a myriad of virtual worlds, copy myself (and restore from a backup if need be), run multiple instances of myself (Can't decide between skiing on Mars, skydiving through Jupiter or attending the Earth Festival? No problem! Just make a couple of copies, send them off, and re-integrate them when they get back), and be able to acquire knowledge and skills almost instantly and with perfect recall by downloading it into my mind-state.

If I could do all that, I'd transcend my solely meatspace existance quicker than you can say "Singularity".

[Killfacer]

I wish i was a technocrat.

[piet11111]

i would probably stick with a physical "body" that is heavily augmented with cybernetics until i feel comfortable with the whole uploading thing as the prospect of "data corruption" scares the crap out of me.

so i guess i will remain a "meatspacer" for quite some time.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

I wish i was a technocrat.

What's Technocracy got to do with it? The stuff I was talking about is the subject of Transhumanism.


i would probably stick with a physical "body" that is heavily augmented with cybernetics until i feel comfortable with the whole uploading thing as the prospect of "data corruption" scares the crap out of me.

Does the idea of getting cancer scare the crap out of you? That's basically corruption of some of your cell's DNA.

At least data corruption doesn't malignantly spread itself.

[Dr Mindbender]

Partly. There are many other advantages to a digital existance. Firstly, I would be able to travel anywhere via the Internet as fast as bandwidth would allow, and once fully downloaded inhabit any structure capable of supporting my software (robot body, local terminal/mainframe, vehicle, holographic projector, and so on) - meaning I could go almost anywhere in the world as easily as meatbags visit websites.

".

To me, this is where it becomes a philosphical issue. If you were existing 'digitally' would you appreciate the benefits on as many levels if you didnt have a body and brain, complete with human emotions?

[Dr Mindbender]

At least data corruption doesn't malignantly spread itself.

Nope, but someone could press a 'delete' button on you and theres fuck all you could do about it.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

To me, this is where it becomes a philosphical issue. If you were existing 'digitally' would you appreciate the benefits on as many levels if you didnt have a body and brain, complete with human emotions?

Since vitalism is dead, I don't see any part of human existance that could not be simulated. Indeed, we could be living in an extremely detailed simulation right now. I don't lend much credence to that hypothesis myself, but it is interesting to think about.


Nope, but someone could press a 'delete' button on you and theres fuck all you could do about it.

Not if the only person with root access is yourself.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

What? So Ted Williams can't come back?

Anyway, I was worried this was regarding the 'suspended animation' in Planet of the Apes. It will be possible soon :lol:

[Lord Testicles]

Indeed, we could be living in an extremely detailed simulation right now.

Apparently, chances are we're living in a simulation.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=XCLQHdK3EIQ

[Black Dagger]

Partly. There are many other advantages to a digital existance. Firstly, I would be able to travel anywhere via the Internet as fast as bandwidth would allow, and once fully downloaded inhabit any structure capable of supporting my software (robot body, local terminal/mainframe, vehicle, holographic projector, and so on) - meaning I could go almost anywhere in the world as easily as meatbags visit websites.

As well as being able to travel around the real world at the speed of light, I would be able to explore a myriad of virtual worlds, copy myself (and restore from a backup if need be), run multiple instances of myself (Can't decide between skiing on Mars, skydiving through Jupiter or attending the Earth Festival? No problem! Just make a couple of copies, send them off, and re-integrate them when they get back), and be able to acquire knowledge and skills almost instantly and with perfect recall by downloading it into my mind-state.

If I could do all that, I'd transcend my solely meatspace existance quicker than you can say "Singularity".

Hmm, that all sounds very unlikely to ever be possible? Virtual reality sure - but what you're talking about - virtual existance rather than simulation would be impossibly complex, like converting the biological matter that stores your memories into something a computer can process authentically, or otherwise replicating human memories in a machine. I also think it's based on a false conception of human consciousness, i.e. the idea that it human consciousness can exist outside of the human brain.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Hmm, that all sounds very unlikely to ever be possible? Virtual reality sure - but what you're talking about - virtual existance rather than simulation would be impossibly complex, like converting the biological matter that stores your memories into something a computer can process authentically, or otherwise replicating human memories in a machine. I also think it's based on a false conception of human consciousness, i.e. the idea that it human consciousness can exist outside of the human brain.

Considering that there's no such thing as a "soul", it therefore follows that consciousness is a strictly physical process. So I see no reason why a sufficiently sophisticated computer cannot simulate or emulate that process in enough detail as to make no real difference subjectively speaking.

[Black Dagger]

it therefore follows that consciousness is a strictly physical process

Yup.


So I see no reason why a sufficiently sophisticated computer cannot simulate or emulate that process in enough detail as to make no real difference subjectively speaking.

How about, that is way to complex to have be achieved with human technology?

I don't understand how these sentences connect together - it's a physical process - of your brain and body - yes - why does it follow that such processes can be effectively replicated by machines? The human brain and body is not just a biological machine or computer, that is a reductionist conception of the human body.

TBH i don't understand why you would desire to be 'almost' human or 'real enough' to pass as one. I want to enjoy real emotions, feel, touch, see and smell - not have these sensations aproximated by computer programs. I can understand wanting to incorporate technology into the human body - augmenting its abilities etc. but converting humans into machines is a bit whack IMO (you're not suggesting this as your goal, but your digital transformation renders you a computer program that is plugged into machines to take form). Losing/replacing human physical form.

But regardless human technology is nowhere near capable of copying consciousness - absolutely nowhere near, not even close. It's pure and utter fantasy.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

How about, that is way to complex to have be achieved with human technology?

But will that always be the case? What makes you so sure?


I don't understand how these sentences connect together - it's a physical process - of your brain and body - yes - why does it follow that such processes can be effectively replicated by machines? The human brain and body is not just a biological machine or computer, that is a reductionist conception of the human body.Well, what else is it?


TBH i don't understand why you would desire to be 'almost' human or 'real enough' to pass as one. I want to enjoy real emotions, feel, touch, see and smell - not have these sensations aproximated by computer programs.Again, there's no reason why we can't eventually make "virtual" and real experiences indistinguishable. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if it was possible to make virtual experiences more wide-ranging and intense than what can be experienced solely through the human body.

Once a human personality has been rendered into a computer program, it will be possible to alter it's parameters. Computer operating systems can run multiple programs at once - imagine being able to hold multiple thoughts, carry on multiple conversations, and have multiple experiences without getting confused or detracting from the sum of each experience.


I can understand wanting to incorporate technology into the human body - augmenting its abilities etc. but converting humans into machines is a bit whack IMO (you're not suggesting this as your goal, but your digital transformation renders you a computer program that is plugged into machines to take form). Losing/replacing human physical form.What's so special about the human body in particular? Sapience, and the increasing power and diversification thereof, is what I consider important. If you want to keep your human body, flawed as it is, then I have no problem with that. But if such transformations as I have discussed are possible, then we should use them to the advantage of the greater whole.

For example, it would be much easier to explore and colonise the universe in digital form.


But regardless human technology is nowhere near capable of copying consciousness - absolutely nowhere near, not even close. It's pure and utter fantasy.So was human flight, once. It's a goal I think we should aim for.

[Dr Mindbender]

I would find transhumanism more seductive if there was some way of combining both the benefits of being a flesh based organism and of being a digital being or cyborg. I'm not sure if thats even possible though.

[piet11111]

I would find transhumanism more seductive if there was some way of combining both the benefits of being a flesh based organism and of being a digital being or cyborg. I'm not sure if thats even possible though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain-computer_interface

its being worked on and some very promising stuff has been accomplished already like a monkey that controlled a robotic arm.

personally i would like to use cybernetics to enhance my ability's as much as possible but i do not want to get rid of my entire brain to be replaced with technology because its unclear to me if my consciousness would actually get transferred or copied followed by my actual consciousness being destroyed.

NoXion seems comfortable in doing that but i have massive doubts so i would not make that step until i know i would be ok.

[spice756]

Considering that there's no such thing as a "soul", it therefore follows that consciousness is a strictly physical process. So I see no reason why a sufficiently sophisticated computer cannot simulate or emulate that process in enough detail as to make no real difference subjectively speaking.

We no nothing about when person is alive or dead .All we know if people have conscious you are alive.We don't understand conscious or what is conscious .

You have to have brain activity for conscious .We don't know if we can put conscious on a computer or what will happen to the conscious .Will the conscious be the same and will it work or not.

[Invincible Summer]

I would find transhumanism more seductive if there was some way of combining both the benefits of being a flesh based organism and of being a digital being or cyborg. I'm not sure if thats even possible though.


http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:uJecLXlLgFDcoM:http://assimilated.pl/borg.gif

Borg, anyone?