/sci/ - Science & Math

100 years is not enough to you?
Wanna life forever?

>>11178543
>>>/church/ is that way

>>11178705
I would like to live 1000 years.

>>11178543
>believe something is possible
>care enough about it
>acquire knowledge and resources
>accomplish it yourself
~
>believe something is impossible
>...
It is a noble thing to inspire hope.

>>11178543
Most "diseases associated with aging" are not caused by aging at all. Our calcium intake is too high, which causes caclification and magnesium depletion. This is the reason why Asians often look so much younger, because their cuisines don't use milk, and many find cheese disgusting. The current RDI was determined in such a way that the human body is unable to excrete more than it absorbs, which mean that once your bones stop growing and fill up with calcium, the accumulating calcium starts ruining your body. Optimal calcium intake is unlikely to be above 300mg.

>>11178543
>Is there any legitimacy to claims made by proponents of longevity?

Curing baldness and wrinkles is about a million times easier than greatly extending longevity.

Until they can take a 90 year old wrinkled bald man and give him a child's smooth skin with thick dark hair, you can ignore any longevity snake oil salesmen.

>>11178946
>chin-chong bullshit

>>11178543
For life, you need enviroment, isn't that obvious?

>>11178543
Deviation is illegal, mass is strange, everybody minding his own, all watching same series online, or their own...

I don't know if it does makes each other autists or help them selves, I haven't got into it, seemed like suicide to me.

Opinions become illegal, stuff that is in television is bound to happen.

Strange thing this mind.

>>11179178
Consider two kids:

One is locked at home, forced playing alone...

Another is out socializing...

Well, most people stream same media ansychronously and they don't meet very much having this information, to discuss them.

In place like job, where you are lucky to talk, you can get with flow or deviant.

Question is if this bunch of people doesn't just really on social reflexes, instead of thinking about what is really important and how others feel.

I guess it's like problems with I'm fine.

Nobody ever admits, because he gets what?

CURED.

Now read leaflet to the depression pills. It makes you genuelly something like... More depressed?

>Does anyone have insight on how to sift the pseudo-science from the real information?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

>>11178972
>Curing baldness and wrinkles is about a million times easier than greatly extending longevity.

It may be in fact close to identical, as your veins get ripped apart for the same reason you get wrinkles.

>>11178705
Fuck no. Give me two fucking centuries at the very least. I want to live in the time period where we're an interstellar race, traveling amongst the stars regularly.

Also, is it even remotely possible to extend the lifespan of people that long?

>>11178543

Until they come up with documented reproducible evidence that what ever snake oil they are selling to you is SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER than:
daily exercising,
maintaining a healthy body weight,
a stable family life,
no drinking or drugs

You can just ignore them

>>11178946
>>11179291
Another cause may be zinc. Zinc causes copper deficiency and replaces other metals, likely cobalt (virtually all zinc proteins can also work with cobalt). It might be that people found "the philosopher's stone" (a zinc mineral) that "transmuted" copper into "gold" (brass) when heated and everyone got poisoned over time. (zinc is spread through air)

>>11178543
Basically it's legit. To sum up the current knowledge practically, as long as the meat is in good condition the problem is tractable. If the meat is not in good condition no amount of treatment at the current level of technology is sufficient.

>>11180864
So the solution for immortality is cured meat?

>>11179188
You sound like Enrish isn't you're first language

>>11180864
+1

>>11178543
The techies may answer that even if almost all biological species are eliminated eventually, many species survive for thousands or millions of years, so maybe techies too can survive for thousands or millions of years. But when large, rapid changes occur in the environment of biological species, both the rate of appearance of new species and the rate of extinction of existing species are greatly increased. Technological progress constantly accelerates, and techies like Ray Kurzweil insist that it will soon become virtually explosive; consequently, changes come more and more rapidly, everything happens faster and faster, competition among self-prop systems becomes more and more intense, and as the process gathers speed the losers in the struggle for survival will be eliminated ever more quickly. So, on the basis of the techies' own beliefs about the exponential acceleration of technological development, it's safe to say that the life-expectancies of human-derived entities, such as man-machine hybrids and human minds uploaded into machines, will actually be quite short. The seven-hundred year or thousand-year life-span to which some techies aspire is nothing but a pipe-dream.

>>11178543
Singularity University, which we discussed in Part VI of Chapter One of this book, purportedly was created to help technophiles "guide research" and "shape the advances" so that technology would "improve society." We pointed out that Singularity University served in practice to promote the interests of technology-orientated businessmen, and we expressed doubt that the majority of technophiles fully believed in the drivel about "shaping the advances" to "improve society." It does seem, however, that the techies -the subset of the technophiles that we specified at the beginning of this Part V of the present chapter-are entirely sincere in their belief that organizations like Singularity University will help them to "shape the advances" of technology and keep the technological society on the road to a utopian future. A utopian future will have to exclude the competitive processes that would deprive the techies of their thousand-year life-span. But we showed in Chapter One that the development of our society can never be subject to rational control: The techies won't be able to "shape the advances" of technology, guide the course of technological progress, or exclude the intense competition that will eliminate nearly all techies in short order.

>>11178543
In view of everything we've said up to this point, and in view moreover of the fact that the techies' vision of the future is based on pure speculation and is unsupported by evidence, one has to ask how they can believe in that vision. Some techies, e.g. , Kurzweil, do concede a slight degree of uncertainty as to whether their expectations for the future will be realized, but this seems to be no more than a sop that they throw to the skeptics, something they have to concede in order to avoid making themselves too obviously ridiculous in the eyes of rational people. Despite their pro forma admission of uncertainty, it's clear that most techies confidently expect to live for many centuries, if not forever, in a world that will be in some vaguely defined sense a utopia. Thus Kurzweil states flatly: "We will be able to live as long as we want... ." He adds no qualifiers-no "probably," no "if things turn out as expected." His whole book reveals a man intoxicated with a vision of the future in which, as an immortal machine, he will participate in the conquest of the universe. In fact, Kurzweil and other techies are living in a fantasy world.

>>11178705
I'd like to like longer, death is a wasteful and inefficient process