67 replies to this topic

[Julia36]

 

 

Yes, the difference between us is in what we mean by identity.

E.g. what what makes us.

 

 

According to you, something build from atoms, that is the same with you, is actually you. 

 

 

According to me, this is simply illogical. Two twins are not one and the same person. 

 

 

 

I like you hope that in the future the quantum archaeology grid will be built for each human individual, who ever lived, to the tiniest details (on the level of atoms perhaps), and microrobots will be able to build them. But the fact itself, that they will be build using your model, means, that this is a copy of you. The same as printing a book thousands of times. 

 

I don't agree, that interchangability of atoms is an argument on your side. Two atoms of oxygen are interchangable in function, but not in identity. You can't say this atom is the other atom. The first atom is not the other atom ofcourse. 

 

And Ettinger writes many things about the identity, but as you know, he has saved his original parts via cryonics and he has done this in order his original body to be revived, not in order for him to be copy-pasted. If he wanted simply to be copy-pasted, he would make for example a full body MRI, instead of cryonizing himself. 

 

On your example on the personal level, you mess up law definition of identity with the biological identity. These two are different, and can't be compared. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By the way, what is ment by "the Ship of Theseus" in yor philosophy? 

 

 

 

what do you mean what makes us?

 

Is this a religious view?

ie do yo think we are made?

 

You are correct in that the new you is a copy of the old you at the moment of death.

 

But I argue that 1. the pattern or function is what you are, and that is essentially your memories, both reactive and complex.

2. Copying happens  as pasrt of biological human process of life, and you are copies dilay without losing your identity, in the same way that a ship is repaired regularly but still is the same ship -->Ship of Theseus)

 

 

Let me ask you a different question from the one that is unresolvable between us:

 

What makes one person different from another?

 

Twins speraye the moment the fertilised egg sp[lit ontp two distinct embryos.

From that point 2 people are formed.

 

However that ios not the copying proposed by Quantum Archaeology.

 

QA proposes calculating in the way Feydor guessed could happen, by working out a scientific description of the person and building him back to life with continuance of memory.

 

The fact Ettinger saved bodiy parts is irrelevant po the logic of the argument of identity.

But you are right, Ettinger warned that Quantum Archaeology only gave the map and the map is not the territory.

 

The map is not but a recipie is the plan of the cake.

 

the deep issue is how accurate do you need to copy to say this is the man reborn?

 

I assert it is only t the smallest re;levant size.

 

Anything smaller than 5 nanomters is presently thought not to affect a person when smaller parts are swapped for similar ones.

 

It is the archtecture that makles the man.

 

The man is his function.

Indeed his function is his pattern.

and ion p-sychological terms, his patterns is his mind.

 

Hios mind is the workings of his brain in its body and nourishing envrinment.

 

 

Alternately, Superintelligence will resurrect every person and every possible person,

 

in every possible scenario.

 

Your deceased person must have some combination pof designs and therefroe would be resrected at teh Tipler Omega point (Tipler)

 

I calculatre thjis point--the Singularity- will come when A.I. is self-aware and more intelligent than us in a general sense, and can modify itself in an acceleration.

 

That point will be during 2022.

Edited by the hanged man, 12 September 2015 - 08:07 PM.

[Julia36]

I don't see the point of creating duplicates of people long dead. On the other hand I read that the architect who designed the pyramids and his wife's mummies have been discovered with their brains still in the skulls. There is also a very life like statue of his wife so it is possible to see what she looked like in life. Now if it were possible to reanimate them that would be something else. It would be fascinating for future humans to meet them and hear what it was like to live in ancient Egypt. Obviously though at this stage of scientific development no one is thinking along those lines

 

I'm guessing you mean Imhotep but do you have a reference for your claim? The oldest known  brain I know of is though to be 2,600 years old.

https://en.wikipedia...eslington_Brain

 

 

and no attempts I know of have been made to get it working. No doubt it will have been dissected to pieces by now.

 

However improving A.I.l scanning technology may be able to read some things in it.

 

 

Also I condemn your elitism for resurrecting only certain people becausre they are of interest to you, whilst leaving the others:)

 

in fact the moment Resurrection is possible for anyone, everyone must be resurrected, and the political issue of human rights at resurrection  be actioned.

 

But you are right the brain is central. However to asseret the face can be reconfiured from a jaw, but the brain cannot looks a weird argument!

 

You cant stop resurrection, even if it takes 10 billion years of accelerating technology, because what can be done will always be done.

 

for the dead it doesn't matter how long it takes.

Edited by the hanged man, 12 September 2015 - 08:25 PM.

[ceridwen]

I don't think it was him. No if we're having an identity parade. The architects brain although slightly shrunken was where it ought to be inside his skull and there was dried up flesh and skin on his face. Wasn't Imhotep a Dr?

[ceridwen]

I saw the story in the Daily Mail recently. Imhotep looks like he's in a much worse state

[ceridwen]

The architect's wife had her brain too

[ceridwen]

I don't think it's elitism I just don't expect the people of the future would be as compassionate as you wondering instead what can we learn from the dead. The Egyptians were similar to our cryonics movement today. Only the rich who could afford it got mummified but the royals had their brains tore out and thrown away
I would say everyone can teach us something

[ceridwen]

I think the couple of bodies I mentioned are extremely old. How old are the pyramids? They designed them

[Julia36]

I think the couple of bodies I mentioned are extremely old. How old are the pyramids? They designed them

 

yah i think u must mean Imhotep.

 

He is thopght to have built the first step pyramid 4,700 yearts ago.

 

Dunno about his wives brains. I think they stiored organs in canopic jars.

 

they are hunting for them, so may have found them recently. I'll try and find out.

 

poorish sound:

 

 

[ceridwen]

His wife

[ceridwen]

Well maybe his genius was such that he made sure that the brains were left inside himself and his wife awaiting their resurrection and a life like statue was made of his wife so she could be reconstructed in all her beauty at sometime in the future. Perhaps his genius was such that he could foresee such a time. I hope these mummies are not going to be left to rot in a museum somewhere

[Julia36]

His wife

 

Need a reference coridwen or it's just speculation.

 

We have come out of made up history in the modern age with Gibbon's

Decline and Fall by  demanding

a) referenced sources.

b) valid arguement.

 

I wouldn't raise my kids on fiction at all as the Natural world is so colourful, and fiction leads to a vulnerable rose-tinted view of reality.

Nature is brutal and that's what we have to fight.

 

Egypt was the Great Death Denial culture: religions used by people to steer them from reality of death and suffering becuase they couldn't reason a way of conquering it nor expecting to conquer it.

 

Quantum Archaeology was theoretically possible to write then...archaeology was already being done by eccentrics.

 

But resurrection of the dead is so probable fiven enough time I'd call it certain ie the degree of  probability of it happening  nears 100% as time goes on.

 

So it's certain we raise the dead.

 

anf of course once you riase your parents, they would want to raise theirs or thier freinds would etc

 

dunno why spell check doesn't work on this site for windows 10??

[Julia36]

Well maybe his genius was such that he made sure that the brains were left inside himself and his wife awaiting their resurrection and a life like statue was made of his wife so she could be reconstructed in all her beauty at sometime in the future. Perhaps his genius was such that he could foresee such a time. I hope these mummies are not going to be left to rot in a museum somewhere

 

I think you have mixed different article...

 

this may one bit to which you refer :

 

 

http://www.dailymail...-architect.html

 

but this was 100 years + later than Imhotep who built the first step pyramid.

 

The brains were left in,  and shrivelled to the sizes shown: on the arrow)

[Julia36]

I challenge that the docu above is pointless/time wasting.

 

FYI anyone using a comment + or - is viewable by the site owners, and attempts to smash postts and threeads will besult in you being banned, with your aliases.

 

There is freeedom of expression on Longecity, and many people have different views.

 

the excavation and hunt for one of the great Egyptians is not pointless but directly relevant to Archaeology as archaeology.

 

But I dont haveto take sniping and ignorant criticism of material that has not been read nor understood

Edited by the hanged man, 12 September 2015 - 11:56 PM.

[Danail Bulgaria]

I don't think it's elitism I just don't expect the people of the future would be as compassionate as you wondering instead what can we learn from the dead. The Egyptians were similar to our cryonics movement today. Only the rich who could afford it got mummified but the royals had their brains tore out and thrown away
I would say everyone can teach us something

 

This is fascinating. I wonder why anyone so far saw the simmilarities between the cryonics movement and the mumification practice in ancient Egypt. Maybe they did it for the same purpose, but interpreted on a different way.
 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes, the difference between us is in what we mean by identity.

E.g. what what makes us.

 

 

According to you, something build from atoms, that is the same with you, is actually you. 

 

 

According to me, this is simply illogical. Two twins are not one and the same person. 

 

 

 

I like you hope that in the future the quantum archaeology grid will be built for each human individual, who ever lived, to the tiniest details (on the level of atoms perhaps), and microrobots will be able to build them. But the fact itself, that they will be build using your model, means, that this is a copy of you. The same as printing a book thousands of times. 

 

I don't agree, that interchangability of atoms is an argument on your side. Two atoms of oxygen are interchangable in function, but not in identity. You can't say this atom is the other atom. The first atom is not the other atom ofcourse. 

 

And Ettinger writes many things about the identity, but as you know, he has saved his original parts via cryonics and he has done this in order his original body to be revived, not in order for him to be copy-pasted. If he wanted simply to be copy-pasted, he would make for example a full body MRI, instead of cryonizing himself. 

 

On your example on the personal level, you mess up law definition of identity with the biological identity. These two are different, and can't be compared. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

By the way, what is ment by "the Ship of Theseus" in yor philosophy? 

 

 

 

what do you mean what makes us?

 

Is this a religious view?

ie do yo think we are made?

 

You are correct in that the new you is a copy of the old you at the moment of death.

 

But I argue that 1. the pattern or function is what you are, and that is essentially your memories, both reactive and complex.

2. Copying happens  as pasrt of biological human process of life, and you are copies dilay without losing your identity, in the same way that a ship is repaired regularly but still is the same ship -->Ship of Theseus)

 

 

Let me ask you a different question from the one that is unresolvable between us:

 

What makes one person different from another?

 

Twins speraye the moment the fertilised egg sp[lit ontp two distinct embryos.

From that point 2 people are formed.

 

However that ios not the copying proposed by Quantum Archaeology.

 

QA proposes calculating in the way Feydor guessed could happen, by working out a scientific description of the person and building him back to life with continuance of memory.

 

The fact Ettinger saved bodiy parts is irrelevant po the logic of the argument of identity.

But you are right, Ettinger warned that Quantum Archaeology only gave the map and the map is not the territory.

 

The map is not but a recipie is the plan of the cake.

 

the deep issue is how accurate do you need to copy to say this is the man reborn?

 

I assert it is only t the smallest re;levant size.

 

Anything smaller than 5 nanomters is presently thought not to affect a person when smaller parts are swapped for similar ones.

 

It is the archtecture that makles the man.

 

The man is his function.

Indeed his function is his pattern.

and ion p-sychological terms, his patterns is his mind.

 

Hios mind is the workings of his brain in its body and nourishing envrinment.

 

 

Alternately, Superintelligence will resurrect every person and every possible person,

 

in every possible scenario.

 

Your deceased person must have some combination pof designs and therefroe would be resrected at teh Tipler Omega point (Tipler)

 

I calculatre thjis point--the Singularity- will come when A.I. is self-aware and more intelligent than us in a general sense, and can modify itself in an acceleration.

 

That point will be during 2022.

 

 

I am not religeous, so my views are not connected with some sort of a religion. I think, that the life was not created by God. I meaned, that we have diferences in what we think holds our identity, and how it to be preserved. 

 

If you believe, that the pattern or function is what we are, and that is essentially our memories, then the correct path for being immortal is protecting and saving these function and memories, not copying them.

 

I already gave my opinion on the fact, that copying of cells and cellular molecules happens as pasrt of biological human process of life, and my view, that this is done in oreder to protect the whole.

 

What makes the people different? Well... lets say the DNA and the connections in the brain.

[Julia36]

https://www.oxford-r...p-opinions.html

[Multivitz]

Good article, I usually point them towards the Trivium. It empowers the student to have the freedom of thier own mentality, and strangely enough, leads to agreement with other like minded people.
One can understand the difference in their past lifes, and can see the bigger picture. Why would one want to upset the process?! Sounds a bit egotistical to me and to have the audacity to want synthetic immortality? I mean, what could anyone give mankind and keep giving if they were alive in body? Sounds like the yearnings of an ancient beast to me!!
The human body has it's limits, it is a sum of it's parts, one of it's parts is the micro organism, we would have to make them immortal to? Oh the plot thickens lol.
One thing is apparent, some people seem happy with the death globe. It should be intresting to see the old true sciences getting noticed, and start seeing people renaming with some sort of spin given for the sake of saving intellectual face.

[Multivitz]

The identity of me is unshakable. Have me held in an energy field, like frozen, until science can extend my life. How kind science would be to save my life, a natural remedy is on par with modern medicine, how kind nature is to save my life. All knowledge is here already, why are some looking for a confusing slant? I blame poor education some contries have. If an idea is valid then it becomes possible. Look at the microwave oven story, it renders a finite biological molecule useless after it's water element has been popped. It took ten years to bring to the market, why the delay? Was it dangerous? Did it fail long term testing for environment saftey? Does the food it heats up shorten the life of those who eat it? Oh the joys of warmed food! No breach of any of the Laws of Thermodynamics here, move along now, just electrified air, a Positron firing invisible ball bearings of energy through a plastic partition into the water molecules. Easy to understand. It's just food your parasites will love!
Has anyone seen the antimatter explanation of microwaves lol. They can't say it's magnetic wave frequency that has roughly a 6cm wave length and that all matter is subject to energetics of magetism waves and their effects. Oh no, that would let the cat out the bag. OMG millions of idiots going around parroting theories of fantasies, being told utterly confusing sets of rubbish. A magnetic field can move in space and be fixed in space and can move with a none metalic body as well as a metalic body. The wave form calculations have already been done, and showed this. Someone came along and scrubbed the intriguing calculation logics, so we don't get taught them. Anyone caught teaching them or using them is socially killed, or just killed, and if they're lucky, not let into the country. No conspiracy here, it's just the way they want it.
You confused, you wasting your time, you feeling desperate for help. Choose one, I wouldn't pick any of them.

[Multivitz]

Talking of wave forms. Even the value Pi has been doctored by making it undividable, Pi has been changed from its fifth point and should be able to form fractions.
To make wave harmonics usable, the curvature of them has to be divisable, part of the curve element is a circle. If the factor of the circle is not divisable then wave conjugation in a mathmatical system will not occure. Remember we are dealing with a wave form that is repeated over millions and millions of times in a volume/area, a small discrepancy would not get tuned out to give the desired effect. We know that wave conjugation is seen in nature, we know that radio waves don't lose energy in concept, so there is a very bouncy medium of energetics we could explore. Feast your eyes on the twin towers? Shame about the education everyone's mind gets doctored with! Real shame we're entrained to chase our own tails.

Edited by Multivitz, 14 January 2016 - 12:54 AM.

[hotbit]

Interesting thread...

[Julia36]

form vs. function

 

Function dominates in continued survival.

 

Your body changes form often as you age.

 

http://www.wired.com...-van-goghs-ear/

 

A new ear or organ grown from your own cells in a lab, commit the same function as your old ones.

 

The specific function and storage of your brain is becoming definable as measurement competancies improve, and there is no science reason why anyone's brain can not be described in simulation statistics, then assembled by robotics....including every idiosyncrasy of them.

 

Yes it is possible to have 2 copies so exact as to be indistinguishable from the original, and this is obviously possible in terms of pure function.

 

An artificial heart for example, carries the same function as a 'real' heart.

 

But so would mechanical ones where the function remains but the form is different.

 

This has been called the nature of consciousness. I dont know if this is a good term.

 

I think it must be possible to list every degree of freedom a human being may do in a closed environment.

Frank Tipler has done that for a human being in the universe, and marked an upper limit to iot.

 

 

The main philosophy argument here is that nothing is capable of uniqueness, since description and construction annihilates that.

 

There are different densities of reality. Reflection is one. It is likely a 3 dimensional reflection could be made in future that does the same thing, and that progressive technologies will emulate any life-form comprehensively.

 

Indeed, you may be able to build anyone who has live from your mobile phone.

 

If that doesn't happen, science will have halted.

 

We'd just be doing tricks with no resulting technology.

 

Edited by the hanged man, 02 March 2016 - 05:10 PM.

[Julia36]

Really looking at what work is being done in different bits of Archaeology.

 

One that excites me is Yale Professor Joe Thornton's work on raising extinct biological systems, some forerunners to our modern forms, which have been dead for hundreds of millions of years: His lab hasn't just done one!

 

2012 BBC article:

4 years old- a long time in accelerating science, and strong A.I. isn't here yet.

 

"Halfway through breakfast, Joe Thornton gets a call from his freezer. A local power cut has triggered an alarm on the −80 °C appliance in his lab at the University of Oregon in Eugene, and it has sent out an automatic call. Thornton breaks off our conversation and calls his senior research scientist, Jamie Bridgham, to make sure that the back-up generator has kicked in. If the freezer starts warming up, a lot could be lost — not least a valuable collection of proteins that had been extinct for hundreds of millions of years until Thornton and his team brought them back from the dead.

 

One deep-frozen vial holds the more-than-600-million-year-old ancestor of the receptors for oestrogen, cortisol and other hormones, which Thornton brought to life¹ nine years ago. Other tubes house proteins more than 400 million years old, which Thornton resurrected a few years later to show how an ancient receptor had changed its preferences — and how the march of evolution cannot be reversed^{2, 3, 4}. In another corner of the freezer rest the ancient protein components of a sophisticated cellular machine that acquired a more complex form through random mutations rather than selection for superior function, as the group showed in Nature this January⁵. The sheer awe of working with long-dead proteins doesn't fade, says Thornton. “It's amazing. The ability to do this type of time travel is fantastic.”

 

http://www.nature.co...he-dead-1.10261

 

In science you only need to prove your idea ONCE for it to be a breakthrough, and Quantum Archaeology is certainly proved here.

 

Like other de-extinctions this is only raising the species and not the individual.

 

QA asserts it must be possible to resurrect any individual by a similar process, using coming calculators -

the only difference is size of calculation.

Size of calculation is only a product of the power of calculators - including maths techniques -you have.

 

Hpercomputers are projected to be able to do simulations of the past that are detailed past the small sizes required to describe any human ancestor, including his thoughts. Maths also will advance.

 

There's no time limit for the dead.

 

When they're rescued, only a few moments will have passed between sleep and wake.

 

Events in the present inherit their form and function from events in the past.

This may be blindingly obvious, but folk seem to have difficulty when you say "That means there must be causal chains going back into the past for ever".

 

 

 

 

16 Ancient Pyramids, Burial Sites for a Vanished Kingdom, Found in Sudan - See more at: http://www.ancient-o...h.j7zinHrY.dpuf

 

[Danail Bulgaria]

form vs. function

 

Function dominates in continued survival.

 

Your body changes form often as you age.

 

http://www.wired.com...-van-goghs-ear/

 

..... 

 

 

Interesting information about the ear.

 

However, they didn't manage to make it from Van Gogh's DNA. So, it is not Van Gogh's ear, that is clonned after all. 

 

So... there comes a question about the possibility of human resurrection. How are you going to recover lost human DNA. 

[Julia36]

by gridding & calculation:

ie using

 

a multi-dimension statistical coordinate graph.

 

The Quantum Archaeology Grid

 

Which is dynamic. It is just maths but can easily be brought up on a screen to see equational interplays for part of the grid of the past.

 

 

 

path of a ball in the past by parts:

 

in 3D thru time (4D) a rolling ball has a different shape:

 

 

Nothing exists that is not actioning with other things.

Everything leaves a trace of where it has been...even a man's innermost thoughts.

This is the Law of Conservation of Information.

 

 

But not by randomness...never haphazard!

 

Everything works inevitably by the laws of physics.

 

you can simulate the past.

 

When you can simulate PAST the level of detail you need for one human being (you test this by seeing what it functions as in maths)

you have a map of them robots can build them back to life.

 

This is not speculative, the precursors to both sciences, calculation & robotics, are already here and being used in medicine.

 

 

 

 

Edited by the hanged man, 05 March 2016 - 09:26 PM.

[Danail Bulgaria]

 

If you want to recover your DNA in the future, isn't it easier to cryopreserve some cells of yours? They carry your DNA and in liquid nitrogen they may stay unlimited time. 

 

[Julia36]

 

 

If you want to recover your DNA in the future, isn't it easier to cryopreserve some cells of yours? They carry your DNA and in liquid nitrogen they may stay unlimited time. 

 

 

Absolutely. Get cronically preserved if you can afford it.

 

But cryonics depends on future technologies for scanning and building back the person, curing and rejuvenating.

 

Those technologies will be A.I. ie complex machines.

 

We are doing increased depth of observation and measurement, and, on trends, will go way past the detail needed for reconstructing human beings.

 

It's not just the DNA that makes a unique human being as you know.

 

The epigenetics are important for uniqueness, as well as what's learned. And there are bound to be other things.

 

But there will a minimum relevant size. I think that is about 5 nanometers.

 

Some scientists have said the position retaining cryonics is irrational if Quantum Archaeology works, but for me it's common sense: the more archaeology the better.

 

There may be new sciences coming which make both obsolete eg time travel or others.

But science advances in well-tested steps.

 

Stephen Hawking quoted today saying not even black holes can destroy information:

"

Earlier this year...

In a Reith lecture for the BBC he told the 400-strong crowd that new thinking means that it is possible to escape from even black holes.

In the conclusion to his lecture he said: 'The message of this lecture is that black holes ain't as black as they are painted. They are not the eternal prisons they were once thought.

'Things can get out of a black hole both on the outside and possibly to another universe. So if you feel you are in a black hole, don't give up - there's a way out.'

 http://www.dailymail...l#ixzz42KK9LWwj

 

 

The dead are coming back and wont be passive observers but full participants in society, new technology bring their brains up to date.

 

wiki perhaps the only surviving bust made in his lifetime.  Julius Ceasar.. The Tusculum bust,

 

Maybe not nuts burying their guard with them as they'll resurrect together.

Undefeated. Coming soon!

Edited by the hanged man, 08 March 2016 - 04:03 PM.

[Danail Bulgaria]

....

 

But cryonics depends on future technologies for scanning and building back the person, curing and rejuvenating.

 

Those technologies will be A.I. ie complex machines.

 

We are doing increased depth of observation and measurement, and, on trends, will go way past the detail needed for reconstructing human beings.

 

It's not just the DNA that makes a unique human being as you know.

 

The epigenetics are important for uniqueness, as well as what's learned. And there are bound to be other things.

 

But there will a minimum relevant size. I think that is about 5 nanometers.

 

Some scientists have said the position retaining cryonics is irrational if Quantum Archaeology works, but for me it's common sense: the more archaeology the better.

 

....

 

Why is it necessary the cryonics to rely on scanning and building back the person? I thought, that its hopes are bringing the person alive again, in his own body and making him younger and immortal after that.

 

If my frozen body will be used ony for making my copies, I will not cryopreserve myself. I am sure may people will think like that.

[Julia36]

The issue is copy or original?

 

 

Many World Theory hold the world split so there are two  seivtchos.

Which is the 'real one? in your philosophy?

This isn't fanciful, the amoeba lives by dividing in two like the cells of a forming embryo.

 

It is Nature. It's natural.

 

The world split and there are two of you, beginning different history form the moment of split.

Which is the real history?

The splits split: there are 4 of you

soon there are billions of you

 

which one are you?

 

Copying can be seen as splitting, and the self moves from te instant of creation along a different history, changing only from then.

 

Each has but one life yet zillions of copies can be made.

In this sense a copy is an alternate you.

 

 

 

 

But an important way of looking at is

 

what does a copy have that the 'real' you has?

 

You have to show something different. Or you're not doing  science.

 

 

 

 

Edited by the hanged man, 09 March 2016 - 07:06 PM.

[Danail Bulgaria]

In brief, you are saying, that the cryonics companies will clone the cryopreserved patients, then will throw out their bodies and will claim, that they have done their job. Horrible. Definately the cryonics companies have to be asked about that. If they really are thinking about that, then the cryopreserved don't know what they are being agreed for. 

 

 

P. S. 

 

Back on the topic. 

 

If the world split theory is correct, then each one of the two seivtchos will be original, but for the world he belongs to. 

 

When the amoeba divides, it makes two cells - a mother cell and a daughter cell. They both are original. The mother cell is the original mother cell, and the daughter cell is an original new cell. The same is with a mother and a baby. The mother is original human, and the child is another original human. 

 

Edited by seivtcho, 10 March 2016 - 07:17 AM.

[Julia36]

In brief, you are saying, that the cryonics companies will clone the cryopreserved patients, then will throw out their bodies and will claim, that they have done their job. Horrible. Definately the cryonics companies have to be asked about that. If they really are thinking about that, then the cryopreserved don't know what they are being agreed for. 

 

 

P. S. 

 

Back on the topic. 

 

If the world split theory is correct, then each one of the two seivtchos will be original, but for the world he belongs to. 

 

When the amoeba divides, it makes two cells - a mother cell and a daughter cell. They both are original. The mother cell is the original mother cell, and the daughter cell is an original new cell. The same is with a mother and a baby. The mother is original human, and the child is another original human. 

 

You raise 2 issues:

 

1. What constitutes a person's identity?

 

 

Ettinger has exhaustively answered this in Chapter 8 of his book The Prospect of Immortality (free online).

 

You seem to argue a person is not the same being if interchangable parts of him are replaced. This is an absurd argument used by sophists, since parts of you are being copied and replaced every second, therefore parts of you are manufacturable and replacable. "The Ship of Theseus" in philosophy goes into this.

 

2. Is Information Theory relevant in cryonics?

 

We have revived a person from cryostasis yet, but it looks probable we will, because we are building enough information about what constitutes a man, and how his systems work, but also what idiosyncratic differences are between one and and another.

 

This involves understanding information at very small levels. 5 nanometres is the smallest relevant size we think, but even if it is much smaller, the threshold for describing him will be passed as computing power rises.

 

 

Further, simulating the environment of the past -  including the people and their thoughts,- will also have a threshold of information, and that too must be passed or computing will have ceased to increase.

 

Computing is just a machine form of mathematics.

 

Histories divides between two selves the moment they proceed down different paths, ie when they split.

 

Ignoring existential risks like asteroid impacts, It is far more probable the dead are resurrected by science than that they are not!

 

in fact to have no resurrections, science would have to halt, which seems unlikely.

 

 

If is wrong in physics to see a life form as something different from non-living forms. There are just the laws of physics acting on and with energy in motion.

 

Reasoning from the cause to the effect is similar to reasoning from the effect to the cause.

 

You can build any sequence you want, within the laws of physics. True for an insect and true for a star. In time (with facilities).

 

Edited by the hanged man, 19 March 2016 - 12:33 AM.

[platypus]

This is pretty deep shit, scientsts have proved that a certain physical problem in QM is undecidable, i.e. it cannot be solved by *any* algorithm:

 

http://futurism.com/19474/

http://www.nature.co...ature16059.html

 

..again an indicator that QA is impossible, since it relies on everything being computable.