/sci/ - Science & Math

God lost the best.
The reason why people believed god was mainly bc of immortality, but now there is no reason for that either.

>>3222194
Yup, screw telomerase.
With this we dont need brain uploading, or any of that shit.
ggkkthnxbai

So what else do we need for immortality if we check organs and brain cells?

OP here, its just a matter of time, no more than a couple of decades.

>>3222196
Pleeease believe in me for a lil bit longer.
:/

>>3222208
Keep dreaming.
Biological Immortality is just a naive attempt of desperate people.

Do you know how complex is the human mind?
It would be 2500 before we could start actually applying it.

No matter how many times you get new organs you are always at risk of dyeing from physical objects.

If you live for a thousand years theres a pretty good chance you will get in an accident and your body crushed.

immortality is only possible if you are digital
but that will never be able to upload your actual consciousness, only a copy.


Deal with it.

>>3222246
So you agree that biological immortality is possible, excluding the accident part.

>>3222251
Yes.

However I also think that after replacing your brain cells enough times and being that the brain is so complex...

I think that your real brain will either just stop working properly after a while. Or you will become a completely different person.

It could work for a while though.

ITT people don't know the difference between immortality and indeterminate lifespan

>>3222246
Thats stupid.
You are a copy of yourself.
You are made of physical law, so the uploaded brain.
The same experiences, the same thoughts, everything.

You're just looking from the wrong perspective.
Your anthropocentric understanding of physics is interfering with the reality.

Deal with it.

>>3222268
So your saying that when I upload my brain info, that I will be able to control my original body and my digital consciousness?

No.
It will be you. But it will be a different you.

>>3222266
WHO THE FUCK CARES REALLY.

As long as i can theoretically live forever i can sleep at night.
So life in universe will end out eventually, thats not the point.

The real point is LARGE longevity, thats all.

No need to point out stupid concepts that everyone can predict and understand.

>>3222268
You might want to read some Asimov short-stories

>>3222281
I dont read science fiction, i prefer actual science.
Also i know about him and his books, his understanding of the actual potentials of computers are very shallow.

>>3222246
So instead of making a copy of the whole thing, you replace the brain cells neuron by neuron. As the process goes, old neurons share their information, their activity, with the new, cybernetic ones, never breaking the process that effectively is consciousness. By the end you are the same entity, only with an artificial brain.

>>3222246
Under certain circumstances, it would be possible to upload a human consciousness to a machine without it being a copy.

It is known that when a suitable device is connected to the nervous system of a living thing, it rapidly adapts to use it as if it were an organic part of its body (see robotic arms linked to monkeys' brains). If you gradually replace small portions of the brain with computer components that function in a similar but superior manner to their organic analogues, your body will adapt to use those implants as if they were part of your brain. Over time, perhaps over many years, more and more of your brain's processes will be handled by these implants, until all of your memories and personality are contained in these computer parts, and the organic brain is altogether replaced. At no point will you have stopped being "you," you will not have died, and there will only be one "you," but at the end of the process you will be a wholly digital being linked to a fleshy body, or whatever body you choose to link the computer that is now your brain to.

>>3222287
Of course. But your post read like you'd enjoy them.
But agreed, his science is pretty soft. But I guess that's what makes them popular

>>3222276
You completely miss the point.
No connection are supposed to exist.
The digital copy is you.

Also, do you think that DNA is NOT digital?
Think again.

Just different machines, software stays the same.

Its like saying that if you somehow magically make a second YOU, organic and all, REAL copy of you.
Will that be you?
It will be you if you kill yourself right the moment it is created.

>>3222262
>replacing your brain cells enough times
That's the whole point of stemcells. Your old cells stop replicating, therefore you need new cells.

>I think that your real brain will either just stop working properly after a while.
It stops working properly because the tissue grows older and the cells stop renewing the tissue. That's the reason why you inject stemcells.

>Or you will become a completely different person.
That doesn't make any sense. Why would you become a different person?

You are also not the same person you were a few years ago.

>>3222288
What do you think will happen when that exact copy is made?

Do you think the original person is just going to be able to control both bodies?

Or do you think they will each do their own thing?

They will be perfectly idental, same memories etc but it wont be you..... every second that passes the copies mind will deviate from the original.

>>3222303
it will be the same person but from my perspective my conciousness will only inhabit my body

>>3222294
If you do it that way, it may be possible.

I thought you meant that you wanted to create a consciousness on a computer as software... Not actual implanted pieces.

These things are more likely to fail then an organic brain. Just fyi

>>3222307
You did not understand that post at all. There is no copy.
Read >>3222294 if you want further details.

Do any of you have links to your points, or is OP the only guy who isn't talking out of his ass?

>>3222306
OP here, /b/ro fist, at last someone who actually has understanding of these things like me.

>>3222294
Is there any research behind this? Can some of you actually link us to this stuff?

My face when humanity will need to reconcile the differences which prohibit the human species from working together, in order to make full use of medical immortality.

>>3222318
>/b/ro fist
Don't push us.

>>3222306
If your constantly changing your brain cells over thousands of years... Its going to stop working at some point because an error somewhere or become so different then the original it wouldn't even be you in a thousand years...

OK listen.

So there is the gradual change (replacing neurons with artificial neurons) and after some time you got only artificial neurons and you connect to a computer.

And you have the rapid change : scan the brain and simulate those neurons.

Its the same thing, only the timing is different, yet still people think that the first one is YOU and the second one is Not.

The reason for that is because of intuition, this is an anti-intuitive method, but it is STILL valid.

>>3222323
It's going to be very interesting to see how wars play out. Also, if this goes too fast, we're going to have people who have the potential to live forever, but no resources to actually do so. We need...transhumanism.

Pfft.

>>3222331
Someone responded constructively to my post.

Maybe there is hope for humanity.

>>3222323
nope we need to let the shitty countires and peoples either sink or swim and stop doing everything for them.

>>3222330
Cool. But how would that work? I mean, these are fun ideas, but what are the actual mechanics behind this? Especially in adults, whose brains are nowhere near as plastic as those of children. I think we're assuming we're more advanced in this vein than we really are.

>>3222326
>Its going to stop working at some point because an error somewhere
That's so vague I don't even want to address it.

>become so different then the original it wouldn't even be you in a thousand years
You're not the same you were 10 years ago. You're not the same you will be 50 years from now. Your experiences change the way you are and think and act. Of COURSE over the course of thousands of years you'll be wholly different than you are now, on the account of being several magnitudes more knowledgeable and experienced. No, the "you" is the continuity that links the whole process. If at no point has your brain activity stopped, you've never stopped being you.

How do those who hold to the sanctity of continuity even sleep at night? The you that wakes up is far less a rightful heir of the you that goes to sleep, than the you who is a copy is to the you who is copied.

>>3222331
Details, details! Fuck it, let's kick humanity into final destination mode and ride ourselves into hell!

People seem to forget that replacing vital organs does nothing for making you less physically frail.

Take an 80 year old dude and replace his heart, liver, pancreas, lungs, bladder and colon and he will still be completely unable to move around and actually enjoy his life = ergo you have only extended life-span, not HEALTHY lifespan, which is what really matters.

To extend healthy lifespan, you've got to address extracellular matrix pathology, which is everything outside of the cells. In your skin you may be able to stimulate cell growth and in turn reconstitute the ECM, but collagen in your joint cartilage and in other areas gets no bloodflow whatsoever. The current state of regenerative medicine doesn't even have an inkling of a solution for this at all.

>>3222326
A normal human brain can't survive a thousand years, therfore there is or would be no other you than the you with a completely worked over brain with stemcells from another person.

>because an error somewhere
There is no right or wrong! There is no error. Your brain stores data the way it does. The way it stores your memories is what makes your consciousness.

THAT'S WHAT IS YOU!

>>3222339
This was a generic example but it is doable in the not so distant future, we already made some artificial neurons but still far from replacing the whole brain etc.

Our best and easiest and most realistic bet is what OP states, the reprogramming of cells, you do that indefinitely, and after 50 or 100 years technology is so advanced that you will have multiple options for actual immortality.

>>3222342
What if there is a memory cap for humans?

You wont gain any knowledge after like 1k years.

More important memory's overwrite old ones. Etc

It would be pointless

>>3222342
I think the question he raises is the same one as those raised by people who question the concept of teleportation. Essentially, the me who comes out of the teleporter is not the me who went in, so what happened to that guy? The answer in this robot-brain thing is that, over time, the change form organic to synthetic is too slow to destroy your consciousness.

>>3222343
Your brain still works plenity while you sleep, you tool. It never stops working while you're alive, never stops the flow of information. If it does by some chance (say a blunt force trauma to the head momentarily disabled brain function completely but then resumed somehow) no matter how short, you've effectively died and, if the brain lived and reactivated itself after it, someone thinking to be you is waddling away with your body.

>>3222354
I guess my question then is, "How close are we to making the jump from artificial neurons in the lab to artificial neurons in the brain?"

>>3222355
Do you think after 1000 years of technology we wouldn't have found 100000000000000 ways to extend memory?

Wtf

>>3222355
Additional and external memory will become a thing long before brain uploading does. Information overload is not an issue.

>>3222355

We haven't reach the absolute memory cap yet, in the human lifespan.

And we already overwrite less important memories with more important ones.


If the criteria is to remain in an identical form for a thousand years, then you would be disappointed. And, in fact, countless iterations of you have existed and blinked out in the eighty years we get. And no being that remained static in this way would be recognisably human.

No matter how gradual the process is to get a robot brain.

You will never be able to know whether or not you have lost your real consciousness...
If you replace real cells with like silicon, it might not have the right properties to sustain a consciousness... only an illusion of one

I have no fucking clue.
All I know is, we need to understand the brain 100% perfect before we can actually do this. We wont see it in our lives.

Deal with it.

Look, whatever ensures the genetic sustainability of the species should be the ultimate goal, so I have to wonder if there would be a reproduction limit for immortals. What do you guys think?

>>3222360

Understood. When you are asleep, you brain changes. The you that wakes up is not the you that fell asleep. A copy is closer to you.

>>3222362
Thats not really an issue.

You see we have already enough of ways for immortality, either reprog cells or brain scan etc this number will rise as time goes on.

Immortality is nothing of impossible, definitely much before it hits 2100.

>>3222373

Well, you would only know if you tried it. The illusion of consciousness is indistinguishable from consciousness.

mfw people have used diaries for hundreds of years but suddenly they are afraid of external memory!

>>3222380
Agreed. It's a pointless question, up there with determinism and shit like that. Give philosophy majors a shot at employment.

>>3222373
There are no 'special' properties.

If we make "silicon" brain that mimics everything that brain does then everything is legit, consciousness is nothing magical, just 'brain' process.

How old are you?

>>3222373
>>3222380

Why do people assume that silicone based consciousness would be or feel any different from carbon based?

>>3222373

Consciousness IS an illusion of higher brain functions.

>>3222391
Ignore dualists. These are the people that think the world ends when we blink.

>>3222380
No, like im saying...

Other people never know whether your consciousness is gone. The synthetic copy might respond to question etc. But it might not actually feel like the old you.

From the outside it might look completely fine. But on the inside its just a computer. Then the entire human race will convert to robots and nobody on earth will have a real consciousness.

So im fine with staying a human. Id rather not take the risk. Its literally impossible to know what it will be like before you try it. If I was gonna try it, it would be at like age 60 when im about to die anyways.

>>3222401
Because humans are special.

>>3222385

Not pointless.

But unlike with determinism, the answer is not immediately obvious.

Am I a pattern of information, which will be just as conscious whether I am running in my original brain, or a cloned brain, or a digital brain simulator?

Or is consciousness the process, and any interrupt would destroy it?


Only those who get uploaded or copied will know for sure. And we won't be able to trust their testimony, either, since zimbo's will still claim to be conscious,

>>3222406

>>3222374
I think it pretty simple: you either are immortal or you have kids. Two kids at most, at that. Eventually, that would tend to a world where everyone's become an undying, so unless someone suddenly dies (accidents will probably never be able to be truly prevented as a cause of death) the population not only remains the same in numbers, but also in people.

>>3222401

Because we have systems that automatically assign agency to things that look like human beings.

>>3222412
>
Only those who get uploaded or copied will know for sure. And we won't be able to trust their testimony, either, since zimbo's will still claim to be conscious,

this, i just said that

>>3222406
>real consciousness
>real

I seriously hope you didn't do that.

>>3222412
You are your synaptic connections. That's it. Your persona, memories, temperament, etc is an oscillating electrical message. It never turns off because you would die if it did. If we can replicate these connections and sustain the message, you will be conscious.

>>3222246
>immortality is only possible if you are digital

>>3222406
Its 3AM and you made me lol.

>>3222401
>Why do people assume that silicone based consciousness would be or feel any different from carbon based?

Because they are 2 fucking different elements.

With that logic, I could claim that we can recreate an entire human with just oxygen. A fucking gas.

>>3222415
Sadly, there's also no guarantee that we will eliminate crime, war, and disease as well. Disease is killable, but aberrant behavior will be tough.

Why do I have the feeling that there is a serious case of troll infestation in this thread?

>>3222447

The general trend has been towards more peaceful, amiable behavior. I see no reason this would not continue.

>>3222460
I HAVE NO MOUTH AND I MUST SCREAM

>>3222436
What logic is that?

You sure know a lot about consciousness, please enlighten us all; why would the chemistry behind the consciousness change how it feels, and how?

>>3222463
also police force of the future ass-whooping. and better societies.

Neuroscientist here.

Guys, there is NO CONSCIOUSNESS.
NOT, NADA, ZERO, NEIN, NULL, 0.

At least the way you think it is.
Its just the pattern of oscillators in frontal lobes to eventually induce a 'decision'.
Its a well known evolutionary trait.

Animals have too 'consciousness' we just have more memory in it so it seems to us that we are conscious or 'more' conscious.

Read the fucking science.

No-one here realizes that new brain cells doesn't actually extend your brains life? since once a cell in the brain dies, all its connections are lost, ie even if this is pulled off, your memory would only work for a bit, and your mental abilities would have to be constantly renewed

>>3222478
>why would the chemistry behind the consciousness change how it feels, and how?

I dont know, ask god.

Your logic assumes that we can create anything out of anything. Until silicon is proven to create life then I have no reason to believe it can.

I don't wanna live forever. I just wanna be in the first generation that lives past 200. Give me that and I'll be happy.

>>3222486
is it also true that eastern religion thats all about reaching 'enlightenment' by smoking weeds and meditating is simply chasing after the feeling that most animals and brain-damaged people feel 24/7?

>>3222499
not him but..full retard.
You just need a cup of physics/chemistry/biology 101.

>>3222510
HurRrrRrr

I can make circuits with silicon so it should be able to think on its own!!! :DDDDDDDDDD XD

>>3222496
>since once a cell in the brain dies, all its connections are lost,

one single cell >< memories

Funfact, there are braincells dieing all the time without you noticing anything.

>>3222486

You do not experience your existence from your subjective perspective?

We can explain decision making, we can explain agency assignment, we can explain all of the functions of the brain. But good luck explaining why we feel like we are inside that brain.

>>3222525
fun fact, it speeds up with age

>>3222496

They already have to be constantly renewed. It happens throughout our lives.

>>3222486
I think you are confusing consciousness with free will.

>>3222536
Nope faggot, nerve cells arent renewable.

>>3222534

Really? I thought the latest showed it was neglect of these faculties which resulted in atrophy, at least more of a factor than simple aging.

>>3222539
>he doesnt know about the discovery that brain cells actually do reproduce

>>3222503
That's the thing though.

The first generation that lives past 200 is almost certainly the same generation that lives past 2000 and the same generation that lives past 20000. Once you surpass certain thresold, by virtue of having an extended lifespan you will be able to live to the next upgrade or breakthrough. So really, you'll just have to decide yourself when to die, unless you have the misfortune of having a semi run you over or something like that.

>>3222539

Connections, synapses, have to be constantly renewed.

And I understand brain cells do regrow, slowly.

>>3222543
You do realize that that is not true, link and show sources, or GTFO

>>3222503
>first generation that lives past 200
Live in the year 2200, with the body of a midtwen and hit on girls that don't even have a tenth of your age!

Suddenly you want to stop being a loner and start a family... why not add another hundred years... and then another hundred years and another and another...

>>3222548
Forgot where I read it.
But its true but at a slower rate or some shit

UMADDDDD

>>3222508
If you wanna know about weed google it, it is analyzed in detail.
And no, it doesnt gives you any 'insight' but can do other funny things.

Meditation is another thing, its not all mambo jambo as most people think it is nor it is what the eastern people claim, its really no different than sitting somewhere comfy and reorganizing your thoughts, in parallel regulates your mood,lessens your anxiety etc, normal stuff.
Its not meditation per se, just the relaxation/concentration thingie.

>>3222548
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn11188-brain-cell-regeneration-sniffed-out-in-adult-humans.html

>>3222486

Interesting. Could you go into more detail, or maybe post some books on the subject?

>>3222537
>free will
> consciousness

I wont even start.

Wow, this thread goes at like thrice the speed of the rest of /sci/'s front page right now.

I guess it's no surprise how many /sci/ducks are such pussies regarding death. Clinging to any bullshit to tell themselves that it won't inevitably happen in the end. How are you different from Christians?

>>3222526
Its the sum all of those.

Just a link tip: http://www.sens.org/

tl;dr: We don't need to understand all the complexities involved, we just do an engineering approach and work on the parts that get damaged.

>>3222585
hurrr
"its the sum of all that "

NO
i can say that about anything
tell me HOW

>>3222560
To put it very bluntly, consciousness is pretty much just the misunderstood short-term/working memory, at its core.

Try science daily, it'll be much faster.

>>3222603
so consciousness is just short term memory
that makes perfect sense

but how does memory work

>>3222603

The question of why we feel like we are who we are remains.

I accept that all of human behavior, up to and including why we claim to be conscious and believe other people when they claim it, can be explained with reference to the physical properties of the brain.

>>3222584

Christians pray and hope. We experiment and hope. Way more constructive, don't you think? And even if we only extend the human lifespan by some decades to browse /b/ longer, it's worth the work. Faith won't accomplish that.

>>3222626
So basically as we all know neurons communicate through 'electric signals', when we HOLD a thought, we store those in oscillators in the brain, different neurons paths form a specific pattern which results in the thought you hold right now.

That is in a very conceptually basic way.

>>3222650
But how does something in the outside world get converted to an electrical signal in my brain?

Basically, who programmed this wizardry?

>>3222630
Reading the Selfish Gene might give you a good idea why you feel you as you.

>>3222654
Billions of evolutionary time.

Information changes many forms till it gets in our conscious thoughts.
From a light wave that is absorbed by the retina till it becomes a visual data.

>>3222654

Valve

sticky please, don't want to lose this

>>3222710
It's been at the top of page 1 for almost 2 hours. It's going nowhere you can't find.

I want a glass jar for a skull, and an over-sized brain.

>>3222696
I'd really like to take Chemistry, Physics and Medicine to be able to grasp that process better

But one is already hard enough

>>3222665

Done. I understand the reason that we have a simulation of our own mind and others minds running in our brains.

But I don't think I've heard a convincing answer for why we have a perspective on this, why we are looking out from inside it. I haven't even heard a good way to phrase the question, so that we would have something to investigate.

I don't understand all the naysayers to life extention(haven't read the thread just expressing something that's been bugging me). Most of the arguments I hear is that living for extended amounts of time is "counter-evolutionary". But, I mean, haven't we gotten past the need for basic biological evolution? Technology has given us more efficient and better ways to do things than nature and biology can. Why can't we be the own masters of our evolution, why is that so horrible?

>>3222650
You say that like there weren't thousands of debates going on about that topic.
Or am I wrong?

On a sidenote, I just read some article about free will being caused by... quantum fluctuations in microtubuli

>>3222744

>free will

>probabilistic

Well, it's better than most of what free will is supposed to be. At least this one actually says what free will is.

What do you guys think would happen when you just take a brain-in-a-jar, assuming that's somehow possible and don't let it get any input

I always wondered what would probably happen.

woah woah woah

...bump

>>3222744

Free will = decision free of oppression.
People take it literally, thats why they end up in loops.
In any case.
There can be deterministic or chaotic 'wills'.
Probabilistic free will is just deterministic, in quantum indeterminacy is just something unavailable to us, but still deterministic.

No matter which one one is, there is no 'real free will'.
Since its either chaotic (pure random, which doesnt make sense in this universe) or Deterministic/Probabilistic which obeys physical stimuli.

The Free Will everyone talks about can only exist if there is such thing as Spirit or Soul.

>>3222806
I am aware of that.
I might have given you guys the wrong look, I just wonder if something as small as quantum fluctuations could play a role with microtubuli.

I mean, they may be small, but they are still 2-digit nanometers.

>>3222793
the brain would experience a sensation of total nothingness. no sight, no sound, no touch, no taste, no exterior receptors.
left long enough, they'd probably go bonkers from the lack of any kind of stimuli

>>3222863
and then we plug them back in right, to report back.

lol who let the transhomos out of their closet. they were supposed to get out during the singularity.

a few facts:

only some cells in the brain get renewed in a few specific areas.

no, neurons don't normally die after apoptosis, that's why you still have memories from when you were a few years old

it's not obvious that stem cells can replace absolutely any cell in the brain, but it's sure they can replace some of them

i haven't heard of any successful stem cell therapy to replace significant brain areas in humans. have you? reprogramming them in the lab from skin cells is one thing, making them work in an actual brain is another.

if you replace brain areas some of the information will get lost. it's similar to how drugs are used to extinguish memories. once an association of synapses between neurons is gone, a part of your past experiences is lost.

a silicone brain? haha, did you see a silicon bird or a silicon mouse? like a fully-functioning one with a fully-developed brain and all? not even a fruitfly.

how duz a neuron work? lol, we dun know..

etc

>>3223082

>silicon brain

Oh yeah. Just like meteorologists use silicon weather.

>>3222194
We would live longer if we didn't keep fucking up our bodies with useless drugs, stimulating the environment and killing everything

>>3223110

That explains why people used to live longer, healthier lives in the past.

>>3223117
>That explains why people used to live longer, healthier lives in the past.

[Citation needed]

>>3223117

You guys fail at sarcasm detection.