Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 63 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1212
    JimmyT
    Participant

    jamesr wrote:
    If people don’t die of cancer then what do they die of? People will still get weaker and more frail with age

    I saw an interesting statistic fairly recently. The gist of it was: If we eliminated all death from all forms of disease how long would the average individual live before he/she died from an accident/murder/other trauma?

    The answer was around 600 years. Hopefully we will soon be able to make those healthy productive years. I’m a fairly close follower of The Methuselah Foundation. This is a group trying to postpone or eliminate the aging process.

    Somewhat off topic, but I suggest interested readers check it out.

    #10507
    Rezwan
    Participant

    JimmyT wrote:

    I saw an interesting statistic fairly recently. The gist of it was: If we eliminated all death from all forms of disease how long would the average individual live before he/she died from an accident/murder/other trauma.

    The answer was around 600 years.

    Really? I heard your outside lifespan is controlled by telomeres, and is naturally considerably shorter than 600 years.

    Allegedly, every time the cells in your body replicate (your body replaces most of its cells so that every 7 years you have a whole new set of cells – you’re constantly dropping cells and creating new cells. Only brain, heart and cancer cells are immortal – I think). In any case, as these cells replicate, the DNA does its thing and the new cell gets its copy of the previous cell – minus a few bits on the end. Some genes just drop off. Or they would be in danger of dropping off without telomeres – but the telomeres are limited to a fixed number of divisions…so that sets the limit on lifespan.

    You have a built in termination date predicated on the length of this extra tail in your DNA. For most people it maxes out at 120 years. For many people considerably less.

    So, without disease, you would nevertheless, at some point, in a peak state of health – just keel over because your time is up.

    Use it well.

    #10502
    JimmyT
    Participant

    Rezwan wrote:

    I saw an interesting statistic fairly recently. The gist of it was: If we eliminated all death from all forms of disease how long would the average individual live before he/she died from an accident/murder/other trauma.

    The answer was around 600 years.

    Really? I heard your outside lifespan is controlled by telomere, and is naturally considerably shorter than 600 years.

    Allegedly, every time the cells in your body replicate (your body replaces most of its cells so that every 7 years you have a whole new set of cells – you’re constantly dropping cells and creating new cells. Only brain, heart and cancer cells are immortal – I think). In any case, as these cells replicate, the DNA does its thing and the new cell gets its copy of the previous cell – minus a few bits on the end. Some genes just drop off. Or they would be in danger of dropping off without telomere – but the telomere are limited to a fixed number of divisions…so that sets the limit on lifespan.

    You have a built in termination date predicated on the length of this extra tail in your DNA. For most people it maxes out at 120 years. For many people considerably less.

    So, without disease, you would nevertheless, at some point, in a peak state of health – just keel over because your time is up.

    Use it well.

    The Methuselah Foundation considers old age to be a disease. And I have adopted their view. Hence my comment “absent all diseases” is meant to include old age. And you are right, the telomere problem is one of the major obstacles in curing this disease.

    My broader point was: Even if we eliminate all diseases as a cause of death, we will not have become immortal.

    Use it well indeed. (well said, Rez!)

    #10505
    Tulse
    Participant

    JimmyT wrote: Even if we eliminate all diseases as a cause of death, we will not have become immortal.

    Very true. However, my guess is that once all disease is eliminated and people can [em]potentially[/em] be immortal, the issue of fatal injury will become [em]much[/em] more important.

    (Disclaimer: I work for an injury-prevention non-profit…)

    #10506
    Rezwan
    Participant

    What’s so great about being immortal? Seems possessive. Corrupt. Non-generative. Mechanistic. Definitively self centered. Consumer oriented.

    Methuselah foundation, Christians who want to get resurrected, Reincarnation folks who want to keep coming back. Just can’t let go. Want themselves preserved, pickled, kept the same for eternity while they consume the changing world around them. Well, OK, the reincarnation folks are more diverse, but they’re still possessive and mechanistic, looking at new bodies as a vehicle for them to ride through time. I say those new bodies get their own experience, without our baggage, our soul/consciousness parasite. What an imposition. Let the new entities have their own experience.

    With mortality, you have your chance, let’s see what you can do. And then clear the space for something new. Fresh. Innocent. Let your Dorian portrait burn. Let it go. What more are you going to do in an immortal span that you aren’t doing now? Just do it now. “Hold infinity in the palm of your hand and eternity in an hour”. And respect the physical, contextual entity you are – respect the physical finitude. Unique. Ephemeral. Extinguished in a blaze of glory.

    Well, to each his own.

    #10518
    Henning
    Participant

    Rezwan wrote: What’s so great about being immortal? Seems possessive. Corrupt. Non-generative. Mechanistic. Definitively self centered. Consumer oriented.

    Methuselah foundation, Christians who want to get resurrected, Reincarnation folks who want to keep coming back. Just can’t let go. Want themselves preserved, pickled, kept the same for eternity while they consume the changing world around them. Well, OK, the reincarnation folks are more diverse, but they’re still possessive and mechanistic, looking at new bodies as a vehicle for them to ride through time. I say those new bodies get their own experience, without our baggage, our soul/consciousness parasite. What an imposition. Let the new entities have their own experience.

    With mortality, you have your chance, let’s see what you can do. And then clear the space for something new. Fresh. Innocent. Let your Dorian portrait burn. Let it go. What more are you going to do in an immortal span that you aren’t doing now? Just do it now. “Hold infinity in the palm of your hand and eternity in an hour”. And respect the physical, contextual entity you are – respect the physical finitude. Unique. Ephemeral. Extinguished in a blaze of glory.

    Well, to each his own.

    Exactly my take.

    #10519
    dennisp
    Participant

    > What more are you going to do in an immortal span that you aren’t doing now?

    Tour the solar system.

    Aside from that, with a thousand years or so, I would get advanced degrees in a dozen different subjects. I’d write novels, and software, and music. I’d work as a scientist, in multiple fields. I’d study martial arts like tai chi for centuries, and do the same learning to be a stone-age hunter-gatherer and tracker. I’d start businesses, become an expert poker player, read all the great literature, and get a lot better at playing piano.

    Getting really good at anything requires 10,000 hours of focused practice. Not many people manage that more than once. I’d like to do it with a lot of things.

    Need room for new generations? Fine. With the cheap access to space that focus fusion would provide, there’s plenty of room out there.

    #10520
    dennisp
    Participant

    A little more on the Methuselah Foundation (and related SENS Foundation)…Aubrey de Grey identified seven components of aging, which they’re tackling in various ways.

    For example, excess junk accumulates inside and between cells, which the body can’t get rid of. But it decomposes in soil, so they’re surveying soil microbes looking for enzymes they can use to clean that stuff up.

    Mitochondrial DNA takes a lot of oxidative damange, so they’re looking at using gene therapy to insert the mitochondrial genes into the nucleus, where they’ll be protected.

    Cross-linking between sugars and proteins happens over time and makes everything stiffen up, so they’re looking for ways to dissolve those links.

    His basic idea: fixing aging is like restoring an old car. You don’t have to figure out in detail why it rusts, you just need to apply rust cleaner and maybe replace some parts.

    There’s a book de Grey wrote which goes into the science in great detail. He’s actually not a big fan of the telomere approach, but there are other people pursuing that pretty vigorously. Regenerative medicine with stem cells is another approach with a lot of promise that’s not really part of SENS.

    #10521
    jamesr
    Participant

    I sometimes like to take a memetic viewpoint on topics like this.

    We used to be slaves to our genes. For genes to be successful they need to get copied so you get a fairly short life cycle promoting rapid genetic evolution, and adaptability to changing environment.

    By contrast the ‘new replicator’, memes, and the memeplexes that form our culture, religions, political systems etc. work on a much faster time scale than genetic evolution, and so became the dominant driving force for change. Making humans very adaptable in a rapidly changing environment.

    If memes find advantage by being copied by older people, then they can manipulate vessels they rely on for reproduction (ie humans) to do everything they can to live longer and longer to ensure the memes they hold can be copied to more and more people.

    Over time the memeplexes that win out will be those which encourage their human hosts to live long lives and communicate ‘their’ ideas and ideologies to as many other people as possible.

    Of course a successful meme does not have to be a moral one, or sensible for us or the planet, it just has to be one that is better at being reproduced than the competing memes of the day.

    #10522
    Brian H
    Participant

    jamesr wrote: I sometimes like to take a memetic viewpoint on topics like this.

    Of course a successful meme does not have to be a moral one, or sensible for us or the planet, it just has to be one that is better at being reproduced than the competing memes of the day.

    Aha! I see the memetic meme has captured another lump of wetware, and is attempting to replicate. My memes are resisting vigourously … or rather, the memes that use me are making me resist vigourously. Wups! I just accepted the memetic meme! Damn.

    #10523
    Brian H
    Participant

    As for the objection that the desire for immortality is “selfish” and “consumer oriented”, those who want the way cleared for selfless later generations who are refined non-consumers are duty bound to personally make room first. The line forms to the right. Or rather, the left.

    #10529
    JimmyT
    Participant

    I don’t mean to put a damper on this topic. I realize that I started it to some extent. But we are reinventing the wheel here. Many of the topics being addressed have been discussed ad nauseaum in other venues. There are a couple of excellent google technical videos which discuss some of these topics also. Such as the desirability/morality of wanting to live longer lives.

    #10530
    dennisp
    Participant

    I think what’s a little different about discussing it here is that, with fusion and cheap access to space, a lot of the usual arguments against it become a bit irrelevant. (But I admit it’s sorta offtopic.)

    #10532
    Rezwan
    Participant

    Brian H wrote: As for the objection that the desire for immortality is “selfish” and “consumer oriented”, those who want the way cleared for selfless later generations who are refined non-consumers are duty bound to personally make room first. The line forms to the right. Or rather, the left.

    I think it’s called ascension : ) I’m happy to go.

    This is textbook selfishness. Memetic or genetic. There’s this book called, ” The Selfish Gene“. Own it.

    @Jamesr, memetic vs. genetic, a fun novel about that is Fluke.

    #10533
    Rezwan
    Participant

    JimmyT wrote: I don’t mean to put a damper on this topic. I realize that I started it to some extent. But we are reinventing the wheel here. Many of the topics being addressed have been discussed ad nauseaum in other venues. There are a couple of excellent google technical videos which discuss some of these topics also. Such as the desirability/morality of wanting to live longer lives.

    LOL! And if we live forever, we can continue to discuss them ad nauseum. We might even get somewhere in the interminable conversation. Immortal hours of fun.

    It’s not just you that gets old.

    Links appreciated, @JimmyT. Save us the trouble of this conversation. So that we can store up our immortal hours for something really worthwhile. Like travelling the universe (so much SPACE), finding other genetic forms that live and die (animal planet/nature snuff films). Yet more hours of fun.

    Not to knock it. The universe is filled with things to wonder at and do and see. I’m just exhausted by the thought and would rather outsource to others (immortal or no). It’s nice to see all those gajillions of posts on facebook, all those people living colorful lives and doing fun things and sharing. I’m happy to dissolve back into that. Content. Satisfied. No need for me to personally do it all or see it all. It’s being done. The bees are buzzing and the flowers are being attended to. I’ve enjoyed my tour. Peace, out.

    @dennisp, this is posted in the “Cafe” forum, so it’s not off topic as long as people are having fun talking about it. In contrast, things that are annoying, or a monologue, we put down in “Noise” or eliminate all together.

    The problem is, a lot of people are posting technical topics under “Cafe” – where it IS off topic. They need to post things about the experiment, most likely with the “Fusion Contenders” forum, under “LPPX

    Sorry, moderators are being lax. Backlog of thread moving.

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 63 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.