/sci/ - Science & Math

>>2640128
Shit! Did I just travel back in time?

>>2640095
is
>>2640139

>>2640095
but you said action potential, not signal.
I understood what you meant, but you used the terminology in a way that isn't really appropriate. /nitpic

If you use more than 20-30% of your brain, you're most likely having a seizure. If that's what you want, there are some meds that might help...

>>2639944
Also, double doubles!!!
Woho!!!

Still sage though

>>2639943
It's just nitpicking. The action potential only exist across the membrane. You can't really say that the action potential travel from the pain receptor in your hand, to the interneuron, to the neuron connected to your brainstem, etc... Action potentials don't traverse the synapse, neurotransmitters on the presynaptic side trigger neuroreceptors on the postsynaptic side. If the sum of excitations in the axon hilloc reaches threshold, volt-gated sodium channels are opened and an action potential develops across the membrane.

>>2639902
give the impression that he doesn't really understand how neurons work. It could just be a semantic mistake.

/nitpic

Didn't we have this thread yesterday?
And the day before?
And the day before...
ad infinitum

>>2639902
>Both of your brains receive action potentials generated by the taste receptors in your tongues
This isn't really wrong, but it still makes me flinch

>>2639825
With enough resources I could come very close. Imaging studies of you eating chocolate, combined with knowledge about storage and retrieval of memories (when you eat something you like, you retrieve and update your generalised representation of chocolate), could probably pinpoint the area of your chocolate memory. Everything else is a mix of control systems, motivation and reward systems.
A little simplistic, but not implausible.

>>2639651
>Adding random junk
TTAGGG*10K should do it. It's not that hard.

>>2639558
Telomerase can often repair short telomer tails.
Also, Dolly was first-gen tech.
We now have more advanced ways of introducing dna into embryonic cells which cause less damage to the dna.

Also, if all alse fails, there is no reason why we can't clone existing embryonic cells with normal-length telomers.

>>2639537
Yes, but we're not talking about genetic replication here, we are talking about growing a clone. If the source have short telomers, we can simply extend them.

>>2639290
>Furthermore, the clones you make will have a significantly shortened lifespan due to shortened telomeres.
What?
I don't think you know how this works.

How about this:
We have rails filled with liquid nitrogen, and high-temp superconducting material like YBCO.
A vehicle with electromagnets will align with the track, and when the flux-trapping is complete, it folds up the wheels, and flies away. You can brake, by simply cut power to the electromagnets, or you could use airbrakes. You would need some kind of computer controlled safety mechanisms attached to the electromagnets to avoid spin and veering of track.

>>2639094
No.
Human clones would be too expensive to raise, even if you somehow could shorten ontogeny to something like eight years. Simple drones would be much cheaper both to produce and maintain.

>>2638901
http://news.discovery.com/human/brooke-greenberg-anti-aging-genetics.html

>>2638970
This.

>>2638955
well don't call them slaves then.
Let's see....
Advanced Entertainment Biodroid

>>2638901
It's a very interesting study, but it's not really a cure for aging. They made the mice recover from a constructed decease, but they didn't live any longer than the unmodified control. There will probably be a follow-up study (it's probably underway as we speak). It'll be interesting to see what they find.

>>2638871
We can do better than just clones, we could figure out what genes give good sex, and then we could, like, genetically engineer a perfect sex-slave, grown to the customers preferences. Big tits? no problem, small tits? no problem. Docile? no problem. Dominatrix? no problem.

>>2638859
Besides, there are many other factors of aging, like the granulation of Nissl bodies in neuronal cells.

>>2638820
right, well, I know what telomerase is, I just hadn't heard about this study.
Is this the one?
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038%2Fnature09603

>>2638737
That's interesting, has this been published?
Could you give me a link/doi?

>>2638696
>Intelligence, or, why be ppl smarter than others?

Intelligence is a ludicrously narrow concept devised by some idiot at the beginning of the last century.
It's never been properly defined, and I don't foresee how it will be in the next hundred years.

So, you want to figure this out by taking the environment out of the picture right?

Well, you can't.

First of all, our ability to adapt to the environment, and even to adapt our environment to serve our needs, is an important part of what we would call intelligence.
Secondly, we can't raise clones in a box, so there is a limit to how much of the environment you can remove.

I think we do have the means to do this, but a clone would not be a clone for very long. Identical twins are essentially clones raised in a very similar environment, but no twins have difficulty differentiating between herself and her twin. They may, or may not, be similar to each other in many ways (behaviour, preferenses, and life choices), but they are not the same person. Our concept of a clone as someone that goes around, having ones mind, is not real.