22 replies to this topic

[brokenportal]

-Longevity Escape Velocity-

Longevity Escape Velocity (LEV) is the concept conceived by the Methuselah Foundations founder Dave Gobel, and championed by people like Aubrey de Grey and Ray Kurzwei. It outlines how each short term gain in biological life extension can help us stay alive until another short term gain in life extension gets here. If we can get some of the short term breakthroughs done now, then we can stay alive until every mortal biological condition is eliminated.

To think of this another way, we don’t necessarily have to wait for every indefinite life extension breakthrough to happen at the same time in order to have a chance to live indefinitely. Although the amount of time that a given breakthrough could grant us is unknown, the average educated guess on that amount of time is roughly 20 years. The defeat of other similar diseases and afflictions will typically give a person 20 or so years of additional life. So if breakthrough A. allows you to live to 100, and breakthrough B. gets here when you are 99, allowing you to live to 117 or so, and breakthrough C. gets here when you are 116, allowing you to live to 141, then you could continue on like this and obtain indefinite life extension in this way.



The significance of this is that even though estimates for the total success of indefinite life extension research may leave a lot of older people feeling pessimistic about their odds of getting indefinite life extension themselves, the concept of longevity escape velocity outlines for us why that pessimism is irrational. Even if we don’t inform the world any time soon, even if we don’t go all out to get this done, we have longevity escape velocity on our side. Because of longevity escape velocity, we all already have shot at indefinite life extension right now, the 1 year olds, and the 100 year olds.

Many people think that aging cannot be conquered in our life times and so they would rather trick themselves into thinking that aging is ok so they don’t have to face the horror of what they think is its inevitability. LEV though lends great support to the idea that we can get research to end aging done in time for us. The first third or so of this Aubrey de Grey lecture goes over it well. Watch this video from time to time. Absorb the notion of the longevity escape velocity so you can use it as another tool to help get world support for this crucial, life or death cause.

http://youtu.be/1q_YZuKUq5A

Edited by brokenportal, 13 November 2011 - 09:02 AM.

[Luna]

I think the first one to be 150 years old better be like at least 50 years or more older than me

I am advertising the idea a bit at University. Wow people want to die, it's weird. They actually want to die. (And they might even say it in these words!)

[JonesGuy]

I think what we need is a good graphic for longevity escape velocity. A simple graph that tells the whole tale.

We could even discuss amongst ourselves which graphic is the most 'intuitive' and thus likely to convince upon first gander.

[chrwe]

A graph seems a good idea to me as well.

[CerebralCortex]

I think the first one to be 150 years old better be like at least 50 years or more older than me

I am advertising the idea a bit at University. Wow people want to die, it's weird. They actually want to die. (And they might even say it in these words!)

It's the trance. I get the same responses from people, but it's hard for me to really believe that they don't like the idea of living.

[JonesGuy]

Actually, I can't even find any good graphics of the concept on Google image.

[JonesGuy]

http://www.imminst.o...o...c=9011&st=0

A long time ago, there was a good discussion on the mathematics of immortality (not just longevity). I think that a graphic of this concept would be useful as well.

[The Immortalist]

I think the first one to be 150 years old better be like at least 50 years or more older than me

I am advertising the idea a bit at University. Wow people want to die, it's weird. They actually want to die. (And they might even say it in these words!)

Don't listen to those people at all, just be like uhuh ya ok and pretend to listen to them until they walk off, don't argue with them at all. Most people aren't like that.

Why don't you make an Imminst chapter or life extension club at your university Luna? You can print off some posters or something and put them up on the walls or something.

[brokenportal]

There are graphs in this video that plot it out quite straight forwardly. Ive seen these slide shows on the net before but I cant find them right now. If anybody can find them then please post them here.

I know most of you already know this, but for those of you that havent thought about it yet, things like Longevity Escape Velocity are important concepts to inform people about in helping to spread this cause. Im reminded of a quote from a journal article by David Gems; The Hastings Center Report, Vol. 33, 2003 "The value of life extension will depend upon whether the plans are realizable."

It is realizable. We cant afford to not spread concepts like LEV that help people realize that. Here are some other writings that go over why this is realizable, A Response to the "Compression of Morbidity" Mindset, and We can all have indefinite life extension in our lifetimes.

Another thing that seems like it needs to be stressed is: work on informing people, and try less so to engage them in debate when talking about this cause and introducing it to them. (debating people uninformed about indefinite life extension is still fun to do once in a while.) Most people automatically take on the devils advocate role, no matter what you say, if you leave openings for them to inject their opinion. So when it comes to introducing this cause, take out those openings, just tell them about it, and let it simmer in their brain. If you force them to bring up all the ifs, ands, and buts right away then many people start solidifying that opposite perspective right away.

[The Immortalist]

Another thing on not debating life extension idea to people:

If you debate with people no matter what topic it is people usually take the other side whether it be what sports team is the best, what fruit is better apples or banana's, or the need to support life extension.

So it is crucial not to debate but to Inform

[chris w]

I am advertising the idea a bit at University. Wow people want to die, it's weird. They actually want to die. (And they might even say it in these words!)

I know !! It's like most people seem to fear boredom more than not existing at all, I can't really wrap my head around this thing, how can it be better in anything to not have a choice than to have one ? Perhaps many of them cannot really pass in their minds through Titonus Option, maybe some might believe that it may feasible in the future to halt aging but not to make people healthy and able again ( this "naaa, too good to be true" reaction ), that would be indeed a horryfying scenario. But if it's not that, then I have no idea.

If I had already seen all the interesting places on Earth, done everything I wanted to, tasted everything, done all possible "fun" substances known to man etc, then I think I still would not want to cease to exist, I would just sit around for a couple of hundreds years, and later think of traveling even further than this planet if it was possible.

I guess I don't recall ever being in such a hard situation that I would think of death as a good thing in the end, common, I know studying is not that jading afterall ,

BTW what's your major ?

Edited by chris w, 07 June 2010 - 07:27 PM.

[Florin]

Since it's hard enough to get people to have a rational discussion about even the desirability of life extension—let alone the feasibility of specific proposals such as SENS, why would they be interested to learn about something that's even more technical like LEV?

I have mixed feelings about debating people in person about life extension rather than online. On the one hand, there's a higher probability of talking past each other, not thinking things through, and getting emotional. On the other hand, if we don't even try to address people's concerns—however imperfectly, what will motivate them to look into life extension at all? In other words, I don't see why we shouldn't have solid answers to the most common objections about life extension. If people won't respond to them rationally, then I'd agree that there'd be no point in arguing with them, but we should at least try to address their concerns.

[JonesGuy]

There's nearly zero utility in one-on-one arguing. It's likely to be a waste of resources.
If you're going to debate in front of an audience, though, you need to strive to be impeccable.

Anyway, I suggest a graphic, because graphics are getting way better these days. A snapshot can create a meme.

[Florin]

Anyway, I suggest a graphic, because graphics are getting way better these days. A snapshot can create a meme.

The most provocative graphic I can think of is a Ghostbusters-like logo with a grim reaper instead of a ghost.

[JonesGuy]

But I meant an information graphic for 'longevity escape velocity'.

[Florin]

I'm serious (to get attention from the college crowd).

But I meant an information graphic for 'longevity escape velocity'.

I don't think a LEV graphic can do anything about the pro-aging trance, because it's just too technical.

Aubrey's analogy of how our bodies—just like vintage cars—can be indefinitely maintained in a state of health by the periodic repair of accumulating aging damage seems more appropriate. While the LEV graph is one possible representation of this idea, it won't be easily understood by the average person that doesn't even know what causes aging.

The vintage car analogy graphic could be something like this:

[image of vintage car]
Caption: 100+ year old vintage car

[image of young, smiling, happy people]
Caption: Just like vintage cars, periodic repair of accumulated aging damage could maintain our bodies in a state of health indefinitely.

A list of aging damage and ways to repair it could also immediately follow this analogy.

Putting it all together, we have:

• Grim reaper logo (to attract attention)
• Vintage car analogy (to allow people to easily understand what causes aging and how it can be defeated)
• List of aging damage and repair strategies (i.e., SENS)
• Answers to common concerns
• Appeal to take action (e.g., join Imminst, donate to the SENSF, etc.)
• Internet resources (e.g., Imminst, SENSF, CAA, etc.)

Edited by Florin Clapa, 08 June 2010 - 01:44 AM.

[Florin]

I am advertising the idea a bit at University. Wow people want to die, it's weird. They actually want to die. (And they might even say it in these words!)

Have you asked them why they want to die?

[brokenportal]

Since it's hard enough to get people to have a rational discussion about even the desirability of life extension—let alone the feasibility of specific proposals such as SENS, why would they be interested to learn about something that's even more technical like LEV?

I have mixed feelings about debating people in person about life extension rather than online. On the one hand, there's a higher probability of talking past each other, not thinking things through, and getting emotional. On the other hand, if we don't even try to address people's concerns—however imperfectly, what will motivate them to look into life extension at all? In other words, I don't see why we shouldn't have solid answers to the most common objections about life extension. If people won't respond to them rationally, then I'd agree that there'd be no point in arguing with them, but we should at least try to address their concerns.

I'm serious (to get attention from the college crowd).

But I meant an information graphic for 'longevity escape velocity'.

I don't think a LEV graphic can do anything about the pro-aging trance, because it's just too technical.

Aubrey's analogy of how our bodies—just like vintage cars—can be indefinitely maintained in a state of health by the periodic repair of accumulating aging damage seems more appropriate. While the LEV graph is one possible representation of this idea, it won't be easily understood by the average person that doesn't even know what causes aging.

The vintage car analogy graphic could be something like this:

[image of vintage car]
Caption: 100+ year old vintage car

[image of young, smiling, happy people]
Caption: Just like vintage cars, periodic repair of accumulated aging damage could maintain our bodies in a state of health indefinitely.

A list of aging damage and ways to repair it could also immediately follow this analogy.

We probably wouldnt say that LEV is a tool that will work with everybody, especially people we've already triggered into criticiczing the notion and or taking the devils advocate side. It also doesnt seem like something that would make part of a good intro in many, maybe most cases (although we may find differently). Its more for fence sitters, supporters who are having doubts, and for posting so that people that are uninformed and who may be in a pro aging trance can find it and become informed. (A lot of people dont like to be told things if they can help it, they like to find it somewhere on their own so that they can later proclaim that they knew it or thought it all along.)

It is a bit technical, but I think that a lot of people grasp the general concept of it. Simplifying it as much as possible can help, hence I think that JonesGuys search for a graph we can spread is a good idea.

As for addressing their concerns, I agree that on paper it seems to work like your saying with that link, your informing them, theres no immediate outlet there for them to argue against it and or take the devils advocate side, if its in them for the information to sink it, it can there. With addressing those concerns via talking, as we all have found, to utter dismay, when we say it they almost never come to agree and usually argue vehemently against you. I could be wrong, but the best tactic seems to be to avoid that. I find it works almost 100%.

Vintage car is another good one. That ghostbuster concept reminds me of these:

 reaper_in_cross_hairs_movement_for_indefinite_life_extension.png   26.57KB   13 downloads
 reaperworld.jpg   11.21KB   13 downloads  broken_portal_8.png   342.49KB   12 downloads  broken_portal.gif   118.66KB   19 downloads  reaper_fight_movement_for_indefinite_life_extension.jpg   76.76KB   15 downloads  beat_the_reaper_movement_for_indefinite_life_extension.png   296.38KB   17 downloads

I think the ghostbuster style would be the simplest most straight forward intuitable way of depicting this though.

Putting it all together, we have:

• Grim reaper logo (to attract attention)
• Vintage car analogy (to allow people to easily understand what causes aging and how it can be defeated)
• List of aging damage and repair strategies (i.e., SENS)
• Answers to common concerns
• Appeal to take action (e.g., join Imminst, donate to the SENSF, etc.)
• Internet resources (e.g., Imminst, SENSF, CAA, etc.)

This reminds me of a marketing package we are working on. If you want then please do help us discuss that. There is more to it than is listed in that opening post there but it needs more interested parties to help the discussion develop. So far we are considering a few conservative videos, a few edgier ones, a couple of slogans, a corporate intro video, and a few other things. There is still a lot of room to adjust that package before it is fully proposed though. This list also reminds me of a few other things we are working on. One is an basic intro to the cause in general.

[brokenportal]

I added a graph as talked about, and a few other things. The old topic is here in this quote.

The Longevity Escape Velocity, LEV, is one of a variety of great ways to help break the pro aging trance. Many people think that aging can not be conquered in our life times and so they would rather trick themselves into thinking that aging is ok so they dont have to face the horror of what they think is its inevitability. LEV though lends great support to the idea that we can get research to end aging done in time for us. The first third or so of this Aubrey deGrey google tech talk goes over it well. Watch this video over and over. Imbue these tools for combating the pro aging trance so that you may be able to fight as forcefully as you can against them in the field.



If you have more ideas for combating the trance then please discuss them here.

Edited by brokenportal, 27 October 2011 - 02:18 AM.

[JonesGuy]

Yeah, thanks. It's not so bad. My problem is that I am not an artist. I know what I like, but not until after I see it.
Hopefully, people can continue to play with the problem, because if we optimize this concept (creating a visual meme for communicating LEV) then we can communicate more efficiently

[brokenportal]

[Avatar of Horus]

-Longevity Escape Velocity-

Longevity Escape Velocity (LEV) is the concept conceived by the Methuselah Foundations founder Dave Gobel, and championed by people like Aubrey de Grey and Ray Kurzwei. It outlines how each short term gain in biological life extension can help us stay alive until another short term gain in life extension gets here.

Very good concept I think.

Another picture of it along with its main prophet :

[Proconsul]

There is one important point that IMHO must be addressed. LEV is a great concept but it relies on predictions of technological development, which is affected by many factors, not only scientific and technical, but also social, cultural and economic. Historically technological development has not been linear. The progress of many technologies has slowed down dramatically because those technologies have reached the maturity point or because simply there are no economic gains in pursuing their development. There are many bottlenecks due to a number of factors. Even when many resources are devolved to a project, there is no guarantee of progress. One of the most typical examples is cancer reserach. After Nixon declared the War on Cancer 42 years ago the progress has been disappointing to use a mild expression.

IMHO in order for LEV to give hope to people currently living, efforts should be focused on those classes of damage that promise to give a substantial increase in maximal life span and that can be dealt with in the short-medium term. Of course I don't know if there is a single class of damage that if eliminated could add one or two decades of life. However if we could identify such a damage and develop a cure in the next 10-20 years that would be the first step of LEV. Of course the research on the other classes of damage should continue, but if more concrete efforts are put to stop the clock that ticks faster it would give many of us the time to reach the next step. If I had to guess I would point to the development of lipofuscin scavengers. Lipofuscin degradation would not only eliminate a lot of the 'junk' that accumulates with age, but probably it would affect also the signaling mechanisms that lead to cellular senescence. Comments?

Edited by Proconsul, 31 July 2013 - 01:11 PM.