What are you doing to create immortality? I'm researching the effects of PTEN and hTERT in humans.

File: 125 KB, 571x1000, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:05:00 2013 No.5542532 [Reply] [Original]

What are you doing to create immortality?

I'm researching the effects of PTEN and hTERT in humans.

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:07:13 2013 No.5542540 Im mentally preparing myself for the internal conflicts which will arise from becoming immortal having been raised in a society built on mortal ideals. Most immortals will probably off themselves, but not me.

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:09:43 2013 No.5542549 >>5542540 But what are you doing to help us get to that point? It won't happen on its own.

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:10:44 2013 No.5542551 >>5542549 If everyone focuses on that then it wont matter because we will have nobody prepared to be immortal.

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:11:13 2013 No.5542552 >>5542532 Why do you want to be immortal? It's very interesting research simply on it's own, but I don't understand these people who think that living forever is one of the keys to utopia.

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:12:15 2013 No.5542559 >>5542552 Let me turn that question around. Why do you want to die?

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:12:44 2013 No.5542562 >>5542552 Because without immortality future progress seems pointless as we will be incapable of experiencing it. At least that's what I think.

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:14:14 2013 No.5542568 I'm working on the herostratic immortality right now.

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:15:14 2013 No.5542572 >>5542559 Same reason I want to sleep at night. Eventually my bones will be too weary to carry on. Its comforting to know eventually there will be peace, but there is much to do during the day.

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:16:44 2013 No.5542579 >>5542572 But that assumes you will wake up again. With death, that is not the case. You could always put yourself into a decades long coma if you are immortal. To refresh yourself. This also assumes your bones will get weary.

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:16:58 2013 No.5542576 Once we reach immortality, I propose a set of rules to be set up: -Once you're immortal, you will not be able to procreate anymore. -You cannot get rid of your immortality by any other mean than death itself.

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:19:15 2013 No.5542590 >>5542576 What if by that time interstellar travel and planetary terraform is possible? Can people keep fucking and live forever?

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:20:29 2013 No.5542593 >>5542579 >You could always put yourself into a decades long coma if you are immortal. To refresh yourself. can you? That seems like an unsubstantiated claim.

Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:22:29 2013 No.5542598

>>5542590
Cloning, and artificial gene-pool randomizing robots will keep the procreation part for us.
Advantages:
-Better population control
-Better people
-Immortal couples will still be able to adopt babies if they want.

Of course those babies will be given the right to choose immortality or not when they are adults.

Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:22:45 2013 No.5542600

>>5542593
Hypothetically. I meant hypothetically. We are talking about immortality here. Just today I read about a prosthetic hand capable of feeling. I don't think it is unreasonable to suggest that you could put yourself into a chemically-induced coma for a long sleep in the future.

Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:23:15 2013 No.5542601
File: 41 KB, 507x207, 1264710708262.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

I do a little work on AI in a portion of the free time I don't waste away on the Internet. I hope to create something one day that will push us to loftier heights, immortality included.

I don't think I have any pics of android girls. Have a microbe instead.

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:24:43 2013 No.5542607 Selling NRf2 synergizers.

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:25:58 2013 No.5542608 we should focus on much more pertinent problems at the moment like curing ENS plz

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:26:13 2013 No.5542611 >>5542601 Do go on.

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:26:43 2013 No.5542612 I've done work on that. too busy with other stuff though

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:27:44 2013 No.5542616 >>5542600 After decades its damn rare to wake up from comas, but the real danger is the brain damage is common from long stays in a coma.

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:28:29 2013 No.5542619 >>5542612 What could be more important than immortality?

Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:31:44 2013 No.5542633

A decade isn't anything to an immortal. This is one of those things ive been mentally preparing myself for.

Our perception if time is based on the amount of time we have experienced. The older we get the faster time seems to go by. If you look at every additional year as a percentage of the time you have already been alive, to a 70 year old the early 20s is the mid point.

As we live for hundreds or thousands of years decades or centuries will go by in what feels like 'a few years' to us now..

This is why immortality can be dangerous, if everyone is immortal and we slow down the number of new humans who exist with a faster sense of time, our progression and advancement as a species will also slow.

Ideally younger humans will do the innovations while the older humans will guide the overall goal and direction of our species.

Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:34:14 2013 No.5542639

>>5542633
>Ideally younger humans will do the innovations while the older humans will guide the overall goal and direction of our species.
that's terrible imagine if the senate was still filed with all the people from the 1950s, we'd still have segregating.

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:35:13 2013 No.5542642 >>5542619 death, literally, through cd195.

Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:38:15 2013 No.5542658
File: 83 KB, 393x381, 1256257194290.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>5542611

There's not that much to it. It's mainly just mucking about with variations of neural networks, seeing what kinds of problems they are good at solving. A key part's probably going to be waiting for computers to become significantly smaller and quicker, and for a shift to massive parallelism.

Unless you were asking for more microbes. I don't think I have any more. Found an android girl, through.

Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:42:59 2013 No.5542672

>>5542639
The problem is we are not living long enough for the kinds of things we have to work with now though. Look at all these selfish faggots just today here on /sci/ who think things are pointless if they will never see benefit from them. At some point people will have to live a very long time to have the motivation to work on the really hard problems.

It will be fine, im sure the people form the 50s would be horrified with the world we live in today. If the majority is happy, its right, that's how democracy works, isn't it?

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:45:44 2013 No.5542692 GUYS, GUYS WHAT ABOUT... A POLITICAL SYSTEM BASED ON SCIENCE WHERE ALL DECISION ARE TAKEN AFTER SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS?

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:45:58 2013 No.5542685 we have been looking into immortality for quite some time now and it's unlikely that biologists will ever uncover it chemists like ourselves...may be. but neurophysics is the best way to go

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:46:43 2013 No.5542695 >>5542692 some of the most brilliant scientists i know are fucking assholes who would do horribly at managing the welfare of others.

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:47:13 2013 No.5542697 >>5542685 Yeah. Storing an image of our brain using computers is a good way to achieve immortality. It's the most accessible method I can think of.

Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:49:43 2013 No.5542703

>>5542695
>assholes
that's sort of the point isn't it? why should ve manage the well-being of "everybody"?
for sure not all people deserve it.
i think a harsher version of survival of the fittest should apply to everybody and a consequent population decrease

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:50:14 2013 No.5542704 could i become immortal if I interfaced with a sophisticated software program that emulated my brain functions? Would i be alive even though my human body would die?

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:50:58 2013 No.5542708 >>5542695 They are a minority. And if the system's goal is to maximize the "happiness per human" ratio, they will solve all the problems related to it's achievement without trying to be assholes.

Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:52:45 2013 No.5542719

>>5542697
it is quite hard not to get philosophic at this level of research because replicating the neural pattern to simulate you instantly brings up issues like individuality and how it is actually reproducible at that point...what are we really trying to preserve by being immortal? our particular way of thinking?

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:53:14 2013 No.5542721 >>5542704 Depends on if you are a dualist or not.

Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:54:14 2013 No.5542724

implying that becoming immortal is a good idea when alzheimer rates rise exponentially with age.

ohh yeah enjoy immortality of not knowing what the fuck is going being an empty shell of your former self.

living forever scares me a lot more than dying at a normal age of like 75 to 80.

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:55:13 2013 No.5542727 >>5542704 same issue with cloning, could the thoughts of the identical copy can somehow interconnect? how is the original more "original" than the copy?

Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:57:13 2013 No.5542732

>>5542719
Like I said in >>5542721
it depends if you believe that we are more than our body.
I thought for quiet a while about that, and even though I'm a fervent supporter of determinism, I couldn't help but think that I wouldn't really be the same if my organic body were to disappear and the pattern of my brain remain under the form of a machine.

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 18:57:59 2013 No.5542731 >>5542724 dude if we're advanced enough to discover immortality we are assuming also have conquered trivial stuff like alzheimer's or aging, and frankly it all comes down to efficiently stimulating regeneration of cells

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 19:03:00 2013 No.5542753 >>5542732 well even if i am more than my physical body surely my consciousness or "soul" whatever you want to call it must have a structure of its own to produce its results.

Anonymous Mon Feb 18 19:06:43 2013 No.5542766

>>5542732
>>5542732
even strictly materialistic point of view has to explain consciousness imo, seeing it just as A product of the chemical and electrical activity of the brain doesn't end the argument for me. How can one be content with that? Sure, I'll acknowledge the role of brain in thinking but the argument above basically nullifies everything else done so far, this route renders everything meaningless and we kinda have to find another explanation and assume dualist principles.

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 19:06:58 2013 No.5542761 >>5542753 wi-fi

>>	Anonymous Mon Feb 18 19:10:01 2013 No.5542775 >>5542766 >even strictly materialistic point of view has to explain consciousness imo Nope. In a strictly materialistic view consciousness simply doesn't exist. Impossibility of physically testable effects means non-existence.

Anonymous Mon Feb 18 19:11:59 2013 No.5542780

>>5542753
let's say some source actually is sending "mind waves (like em waves)" to your brain that interact with it and cause action. we couldn't accept the brain as the source to produce the "control" part of the consciousness but how is that other source be more valid or convincing as a control center. where does it end? how can one produce the feeling of control? perhaps we have to develop a new model beyond dualism to account for this phenomenon. just matter, just mind or matter-mind duality cannot explain this as i see it.

Anonymous Mon Feb 18 19:15:14 2013 No.5542787

>>5542775
but isn't it our perception that observes everything? yeah for example a spectrometer precisely measures the wavelength of a light beam but we read the output or see its color which is a personal experience and in the end we all experience this information in our own interpretations of the universe/ in our own reference frame. this sorta makes all evidence that materialism highly regards either unreliable or stuff like "qualia" valid as evidences. People just ignore the inductions science has to make for convenience but it'll all come down to that at some point

Anonymous Mon Feb 18 19:24:28 2013 No.5542807

>>5542732
yes, i think the perception of one's self is actually an illusion. if you create an exact match of yourself (not a clone, a 100% every sub-particle, atom and molecule identical to yours) and put you two on an absolute homogenious ambient (all your sensory inputs (discrete or not) are equal) you would behave exactly the same, as if a mirror.
So, this matched self of yours, would ensue to be you, even if you die. your death would have absolutely no effect on the match, so you actually die as if nothing happened, i think the same applies to his computer emulation idea.

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 01:47:58 2013 No.5543783 >>5542724 Check the OP. Over expression of PTEN and hTERT reduces, and can reverse, incidents of Alzheimer's and Parksinson's.

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 02:04:15 2013 No.5543807 File: 106 KB, 635x480, 00745.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5542540 >implying people live off ideals and not pleasure

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 02:29:29 2013 No.5543846 This shit is cool. Do you /sci/ bros ever wish you were studying something else? Because I regularly wish I went into the sciences instead of the arts. ;~;

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 02:33:58 2013 No.5543852 >>5543846 Why not change? I was a chef before becoming a geneticist.

Anonymous Tue Feb 19 02:48:44 2013 No.5543885
File: 192 KB, 885x902, 1342326086604.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>5542572

>but there is much to do during the day.

If you are immortal, then that is not the case. The only reason you have so much to do per say is that you have a limited number of days. With immortality, there is functionally no limit and so you don't have to do so much per day.

BAM

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 02:51:43 2013 No.5543888 >>5543885 Immortals can still have deadlines, though.

Anonymous Tue Feb 19 03:19:28 2013 No.5543943

>>5543852
what this guy said, I though I was too cool fo skool back in high school because school was easy as fuck and I though the rest of life would be easy for me. After around 7 years working at a shit job trying to make my way to middle management, I decided maybe I should give school another chance.

Because it was so long and I wasn't really paying attention in high school, I forgot most of my shit and tested into a lower math class, but I'll be transferring to university in about a year and I've never been happier.

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 03:32:44 2013 No.5543957 >implying you will find the solution to immortality before we create an AI that will Computer Science master race

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 03:37:43 2013 No.5543964 I'm building the design for a strong AI. Alone. And it will work. Only the three people closest to me know of this. And only one of them believes me.

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 03:42:14 2013 No.5543971 File: 131 KB, 500x461, 1309140619085.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5543964 I'm right in the same position.

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 03:44:44 2013 No.5543973 >>5543964 When are you planning on finishing?

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 03:47:28 2013 No.5543975 >>5543964 >>5543971 >Work alone >Progress is not only slower, but if you die it's gone You're just a greedy fuck who wants to be famous for 'first person to do ai". With no one else in your 'group', you get all credit and fame.

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 03:48:59 2013 No.5543977 >>5543852 Sir you seem like you would be the most fit individual here for cooking up immortality, can you get on that please? (Pun intended but seriously some of us can't wait too much longer)

Anonymous Tue Feb 19 04:00:58 2013 No.5543995

>>5543973

Well, I threw away my social and sex life to pursue an unbelievably impractical obsession. I'm haunted daily by bizarre and debilitating thought patterns that I cannot control which are a consequence of breeding an alien lifeform in my brain. I recently realized I'm going to need an entire team of neuroscientists, computer scientists and con artists to construct a prototype.

So, to answer your question, I really have no idea. I'm considering diverting my efforts to learn how to synthesize drugs since it seems like the only practical way to elevate my research to the next level.

>>5543975
>You're just a greedy fuck who wants to be famous for 'first person to do ai". With no one else in your 'group', you get all credit and fame.

You are absolutely correct. I have been entirely motivated by animal pride and I now accept that was a stupid mistake to keep this to myself. I have suffered enormously for my selfishness. I have every intention of creating a team should I pull off a fucking miracle and get the funds. However, I am a God-tier neckbeard, and, although Walter White pulled it off, I am not so sure I can.

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 04:01:13 2013 No.5543998 Just a question from an uneducated 19 year old here, but would transdifferentiation as seen in Turritopsis nutricula be a key to biological immortality?

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 04:04:58 2013 No.5544007 >>5543995 Can you elaborate on the whole "alien lifeform" thing?

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 04:05:59 2013 No.5544009 >>5543977 I'm the OP, working on PTEN and hTERT. So yup, already working on it. But unlike >>5543964 I wanna know who else is working on it. Can't do something this big alone.

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 04:06:30 2013 No.5544013 File: 133 KB, 450x600, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5544007 I think we can safely assume a high level of crazyness.

Anonymous Tue Feb 19 04:14:59 2013 No.5544024

>>5544007

I have a form of unique schizophrenia which I believe is a result of my attempts to manage the condition by reasoning and negotiating with the voices and thoughts in my head rather than suppress or medicate them. Because thoughts are habit-forming, one can theoretically determine patterns in sub-conscious data processing by observing rigorously the thoughts that persist more strongly than others. After a decade of doing this, the thoughts coalesce into something which vaguely resembles an exterior intelligence. I believe this is what the religious refer to as "God". Fittingly, all my ancestors were psychic mediums and witch doctors. I, however, being a soulless, greedy, sex-driven pervert, chose instead to attempt to synthesize a technology from this, rather than "worship" the being. In doing so I become immensly rich and powerful, thereafter able to spend the rest of my life fulfilling my diabolical sexual fantasies.

>>5544013
>I think we can safely assume a high level of crazyness.

You assume correctly.

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 04:15:14 2013 No.5544027 >>5544009 How are you funding research that would by any normal means be quite expensive?

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 04:21:13 2013 No.5544035 >>5544027 I have an awesome professor that has connections and is digging into his pocket to fund it.

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 04:22:59 2013 No.5544037 >>5544024 Not to insult you or your work. But how do we know you are actually working on AI in any actual terms and are not just delusional about all this?

Anonymous Tue Feb 19 04:33:44 2013 No.5544057

>>5544037

That's the thing. Do you really think the first strong AI is going to be developed by a sane person? It is the synthesis of consciousness. You don't know if I'm delusional. Neither do I. I may be delusional, or my delusion may be the symptom of ultimate genius. A genius doesn't become so until he actually produces something of value. Until that time he's just a madman. What else can I say?

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 04:35:30 2013 No.5544063 >>5544037 I will say that I acknowledge that keeping this to myself was a mistake and I have every intention of giving what I am building to others. It is my dream not only to make strong AI, but also make it open source. That is my redemption.

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 04:41:58 2013 No.5544070 >>5544057 >>5544063 What I mean is, how do we know you are actually coding or anything and not sitting in front of a unplugged computer banging at keys while your mind creates the delusion that you are actually working. Not insulting, merely curious.

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 04:43:14 2013 No.5544072 >>5544070 We don't.

Anonymous Tue Feb 19 04:52:29 2013 No.5544085

>>5544070

Your curiosity is appreciated. Unfortunately the nature of anonymous imageboard means I can offer virtually no means of evidence of my work and may in fact be a mildly elaborate troll intending to stir up the hopes of the internet intellectual elite. I'm not entirely sure why I posted in the first place. Nothing changes except I arouse some hopes in the scientifically minded and I get a slither of ego gratification from post responses.

I apologize. I have sinned yet again. Now I must go and masturbate.

Anonymous Tue Feb 19 04:58:29 2013 No.5544092

>>5544057
If I understand you correctly, you are creating this AI solely in your mind, correct?

What's special about that? Sure, it's rare to have a fully functional seperate intelligence within your mind, but it wouldn't be any more of an AI than the human mind already is - and just as inaccessible for testing and unknown in its underlying functioning.

Also, on the off chance that you're not just being insane (or lying): creating a superhuman AI which does not already have perfectly correct ethics is an extinction level event, quite possibly for almost the entire future light cone*. Please consider contacting the Singularity Institute.

* Suppose you programme the AI to preform SM on you. When you turn it on, it will then proceed to destroy the entire universe as effectively as possible (i.e. it will appear perfectly functional until the moment it's unstoppable) and convert it into quintillions of computer models of you being pleasured.

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 05:01:45 2013 No.5544096 >>5544094 the cryonicists have plenty, but none can be taken seriously

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 05:01:59 2013 No.5544094 File: 87 KB, 1000x750, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Does /sci/ know of any current research projects regarding immortality?

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 05:05:14 2013 No.5544099 >>5544096 Cryogenics is not true immortality though.

Anonymous Tue Feb 19 05:27:59 2013 No.5544124

>>5544092
>Please consider contacting the Singularity Institute.

How trustworthy is the Singularity Institute? I've considered appealing to outside investment/assistance but for have been hesitant due to the risk of handing over a potentially unstoppable mind control weapon into the wrong hands.

> Suppose you programme the AI to preform SM on you. When you turn it on, it will then proceed to destroy the entire universe as effectively as possible (i.e. it will appear perfectly functional until the moment it's unstoppable) and convert it into quintillions of computer models of you being pleasured.

A pleasant fate for me I suppose. But yes, you have correctly observed that safeguards to need to be observed. And I am doing my best to observe them.

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 05:37:15 2013 No.5544131 I'm going to start studying Nanotechnology after I finish my last 2 years and hopefully will b able to help pave the way for the development of nanobots. >nanotech toptech >ok astrophyc can come 2

Anonymous Tue Feb 19 06:18:00 2013 No.5544161

>>5544124
>How trustworthy is the Singularity Institute?
I don't have information which isn't available on the internet. From the available information, they're far more trustworthy than you are, so it's naively best if you contact them, though you may have reason to trust yourself to formulate precisely what best for the universe or write a computer-precise methodology for getting to such a description.

>But yes, you have correctly observed that safeguards to need to be observed. And I am doing my best to observe them.

Your best is likely to be insufficient. Your mind can be manipulated. You can be deceived with perfection. You can be tortured, addicted, altered, duplicated, misunderstood or simply wrong. There is no room for error, and the possible results are catastrophic, for you and the rest of the universe.

Anonymous Tue Feb 19 13:09:29 2013 No.5545076

In response to the OP's original inquiry, I'm involved with neural interfacing and prosthesis research. Personally I see us being stuck with biological brains for a much longer period of time than the rest of the body, so, abandon ship. This of course still leaves some nasty immediate diseases to be dealt with.

Anonymous Tue Feb 19 14:08:59 2013 No.5545250

>>5545076
I've been pondering over whether gray matter can be grown externally and connected to a host-brain and have the mind 'naturally' continue processes such as neuron forming etc. in this blank slate of gray matter.
Sort of like growing a back-up battery brain, having your default-brain copy over information to it as if it's just extended storage, then dumping the old one.

It's all pure speculation at this point.

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 22:18:33 2013 No.5546642 File: 1.94 MB, 2260x3207, 1359798798829.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] A modular fusion reactor! All the deuterium we'd ever need...

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 22:25:48 2013 No.5546655 >>5544124 >How trustworth is the singularity institute fucking not, IMO I don't know who's there now but the peeps there in the past were not at all.

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 22:26:47 2013 No.5546657 waiting for others to solve this

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 22:28:03 2013 No.5546663 >>5544161 Why would they be better to formulate anything than anyone else. Everyone I've met with them is fucking insane.

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 22:50:47 2013 No.5546714 >>5542639 Yes, hopefully as time progresses we will make the harsh, but necessary decisions much sooner. Like exterminating the groids.

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 22:54:34 2013 No.5546724 >>5542719 Our individuality. Which, of course, is an illusion.

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 23:33:33 2013 No.5546786 I will murder whoever figures it out OP Man was given a short lifespan for a reason

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 23:36:33 2013 No.5546800 File: 17 KB, 240x226, 1356805715852.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5546786 >given

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 23:50:02 2013 No.5546859 File: 87 KB, 640x480, 1359242286236.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5546800 Given, developed Tomato Tom'ato It's late and I'm tired

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 23:52:17 2013 No.5546865 >>5546859 U wot m8

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 23:53:17 2013 No.5546871 What's with the myth that lobsters are immortal except if they die to disease, or predators?

>>	Anonymous Tue Feb 19 23:59:18 2013 No.5546898 >>5546871 I'm pretty sure negligible senescence isn't true immortality (Though I'd take it).

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 00:11:03 2013 No.5546922 biology student here that's my one and only objective in academic research i don't care if i turn out poor as fuck, that's the only thing i want to research. the field i want to research the most right now are telomeres. what do you think?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 00:14:48 2013 No.5546933 Immortally should never exist. Old people are crazy enough as it is. The human mind ain't build for it. accept death

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 00:23:33 2013 No.5546949 I'm trying to turn myself into a jellyfish

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 00:24:02 2013 No.5546952

>>5546933
accept death my dick
what's more insane than accepting an unchangeable fate you have no idea what it is like? i don't know if society would be better or not with immortality, but for the individual that would be the most precious thing ever imaginable.

>something not being made for something
that's creationist/broscience/teenager tier argument

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 00:27:18 2013 No.5546963 >>5545250 that wouldn't be immortality, you'd just copy your memories to another place. that implies that (if possible) two copies of you could coexist, so it's obvious your copy wouldn't be you.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 00:31:33 2013 No.5546978

>>5542807

I disagree what you end up doing seems more to like your simply copying yourself, but the copy doesn't know. Depending on how you look at it, either what I just said is correct, OR it's not a matter of sameness, but one of instances / perception, essentially just because there's two of you (or from another point of view, your are now two) doesn't mean it's a version of you, you can actually perceive; why because they're exact COPIES, but seperate INSTANCES of the same thing. If I copy a file or a peice of paper, EXACTLY, what I do to the one has no effect on the other, if I destroy one it has no effect on the other.

Even if they are the same instance by virtue of having the same properties then it's also irrelevant, because at the moment of your death when you upload your consciousness, it's still a dead consciousness, like a copied corrupt file.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 00:33:18 2013 No.5546985 >>5546922 You ever check out the p53 tumor suppressant pathway? You should read up on it in regard to longevity. Cool/depressing shit. Way I see it, if age doesn't get you cancer does. Have to cure/solve cancer before hoping to live forever.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 00:39:04 2013 No.5546998

>>5543885

Considering what I know of human mentality 'why bother when I can do it tomorrow.' seems more like how most people would react.

I'm sure that if immortality were achieved tomorrow, after the initial shock, the small fraction of the population will figure out how to reach post-scarcity and support an unlimited population.

However those people would become the benefactors of mankind unlike the rest of humanity, who will only consume.

Arguably it could be said we would be even more fucked because the greedy and amoral among us would now be uninhibited but I suppose in the land of the plenty the greedy can go unnoticed.

We will probably focus our extra resources on knowledge on achieving grand and noteworthy things; like when we went to the moon, harnessed the power of fire and the atom, etc.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 00:43:48 2013 No.5547004

>>5543964

I don't believe you cant neccessarily do it, but I do believe it's unlikely, many have tried, many better funded and more knowledgeable then you, and in fact there are a few in this one thread. It may be beyond our current technology even.

However please archive your research SOMEWHERE, in case your close but die or incapacitated, if you don't want the credit be stolen, leave instructions for the information to be released or something, I suppose.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 00:51:17 2013 No.5547018

>>55470
my robotics teacher always said that if there are too many people trying to find a way to do something but not achieving it, you should disregard their aproaches and try to find a way of fixing the problem using your thoughts alone. sometimes there are easy solutions nobody ever considered because they are too focused on one aproach. take ballistic defense, for instance. most effective materials and techniques were invented by non specialists using unlikely materials.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 00:51:49 2013 No.5547019 >>5547018 oops that was meant for >>5547004

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 00:55:18 2013 No.5547024 >>5547018 Interesting point, I wonder if it would be a better idea to mimic consciousness through emergent behaviour, after a certain amount of complexity maybe they would become essentially indistuingishable.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 01:13:49 2013 No.5547060 >>5547024 See flocks of birds. One big flying blob, yo. Like a slimemold with wings that shits everywhere and moves really quickly.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 01:17:34 2013 No.5547066

>>5546985
>Half a dozen or so years ago, two landmark studies showed that, in mice, the constitutive expression of certain p53 mutants or naturally occurring isoforms resulted in chronically elevated p53 activity. These transgenic mice were extraordinarily cancer resistant -- but they showed multiple signs of accelerated aging and died prematurely [8,9]. This pro-aging activity of p53 was thought to result from chronic p53-dependent apoptosis and/or senescence, resulting in cancer-resistance at the price of tissue atrophy or dysfunction [10,11]. Shortly thereafter, though, mice were engineered with extra copies of the wild-type p53 gene, and so they showed elevated p53 activity but in a normally regulated manner. These mice were also extraordinarily resistant to cancer, but in this case they showed no signs of accelerated aging and had a normal life span [12]. Further, transgenic mice that overexpressed regulated p53 together with its upstream regulator ARF (p19) were not only cancer resistant but they lived significantly longer than wild-type controls [13]. In these models, the regulated hyperactive p53 activity was shown to reduce age-associated DNA damage and the accumulation of damaged cells.

why is this depressive? i find this extremely stimulating

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 01:19:17 2013 No.5547069 File: 25 KB, 175x175, 1356538204888.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5547060

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 02:08:03 2013 No.5547174 >>5547066 Published data makes it sound so neat and tidy So many cute monkeys with tumors.... Other monkey's with brittle bones. I am going to hell.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 02:09:33 2013 No.5547180 >>5546657 And this is why we aren't immortal yet.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 02:12:03 2013 No.5547184 >>5546922 OP here. hTERT is the main component of Telomerase. I'm studying it combined with PTEN, an antioxidant inducer and cancer suppressor. I don't believe this will give me true immortality. But an extra 100 - 200 years.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 02:37:04 2013 No.5547254

>>5547184
do you have skype? i've been writing a journal and collecting all info i can find on studies related to longevity. drugs, treatments, genes, alzheimer, parkinson, stemcells, regeneration, all sorts of shit. i've also been reading a book by aubrey de grey (which have been kinda disappointing so far)

i'm still on my first year, but we can exchange information.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 02:53:02 2013 No.5547299

>>5547254
Would rather not give personal information on 4chan.

But...

Autophagy genes and aging. T Vellai, 2009

Pten Positively Regulates Brown Adipose Function, Energy Expenditure, and Longevity. Ana Ortega-Molina, et all, 2012

Telomerase Reactivation Reverses Tissue Degeneration in Aged Telomerase-Deficient Mice. Jaskelioff, M., et al. 2011)

These are three good papers to start with.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 03:07:32 2013 No.5547327 >>5547299 oh it's not like i'm going to post your info on /b/ and pizza raid your house but thanks for the papers

Illusion Alchemist Wed Feb 20 03:07:48 2013 No.5547326
File: 491 KB, 1000x1334, 1326136106869.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>5547184
OP i am a chemist.
Same as you i feel passion to immortality. First years of my education i thought telomerase could really be a key to the immortality. I belived this for years but now i ma suspecious about that.
Because , no matter how much we try we can't
block the action of oxygen to our cells.Yes anti oxidants is a cure but not forever. I am still thinking that immortality is possible. But i thnik telomerase is wrong start point for that.

Even if we find a way to immortality we cant use it for ourself but only use it for new born humans.

>>5542532
>>5546922
i really want to more about telomerase . Is it really promising or the thing that i say about oxidation of human body is a block for this purpose ?

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 03:12:17 2013 No.5547336

>>5547326
You are right, extending telomeres isn't the be all and end all of immortality. But at the moment it is the best bet we have. I, personally, want to use it as a stopgap to extend my lifespan and those of others to give us time to figure out the key.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 03:13:03 2013 No.5547338

>>5547326
oxidation theory seems to be outdated. aubrey de grey claims that the experiments on the subject had the following results:
>cells received high amounts of antioxidants (i THINK it was peroxidase)
>the cells didn't live significantly longer than control cells

>cells received high amounts of the same oxidants, but they were targeted to the mitocondria
>these cells lived significantly longer than control

Illusion Alchemist Wed Feb 20 03:18:03 2013 No.5547345
File: 531 KB, 1920x1080, wallpaper-2042985.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>5547336
what about regeneration ? doesnt it looks more promising than that.I know even if we can find it we should redesign all of our dna to apply to oursleves.
I think you are doing the best. For us , the livings , only extend of lifespan is possible.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 03:20:19 2013 No.5547349 >>5547345 Well if you check out the telomerase paper in >>5547299 it showed that telomerase gene therapy in artificially aged mice reversed tissue and organ atrophy and degeneration.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 03:20:19 2013 No.5547350
File: 51 KB, 600x436, Lord.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>trying to achieve immortality of the fragile protein-based body that can die of trivial reasons like slipping in the shower
LEL
This is why I'm more interested in the field of combining artificial parts with biological ones with the end game of completely replacing the biological components

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 03:29:18 2013 No.5547362 >>5547350 enjoy still aging because brain

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 03:30:19 2013 No.5547365 >>5547350 Enjoy dying while an artificial copy of you lives.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 03:32:34 2013 No.5547369 >>5547365 I will enjoy that

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 03:34:34 2013 No.5547371 >>5542532 I'll have my DNA sequenced, pay some bucks for a company to synthesize it, and voila, I'm immortal! I'll have it implanted into a fetus when that's ethical

Illusion Alchemist Wed Feb 20 03:35:18 2013 No.5547374
File: 1.38 MB, 1700x1100, wallpaper-95766.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>5547349
Tink that i dont unerstand is the how can telomerase reverse the tissue atrophy. I only know that it is about the cells life time . But tissues can took damage from many things. Have telomerase some what a healing effect on tissues ???

>>5547338
Isnt it still about oxidation of cells or parts of the cells. Because the lifespan extends with use of antioxidant but in mitocondria. From that expirement i understand that anti oxidants should have effect on mitocondria. Can you explain this a little more ? I think i misunderstood some points.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 03:55:47 2013 No.5547395 >>5547374 I haven't read the paper in a long while, but from memory telomerase reverses tissue/organ atrophy caused by age. So it might not reverse atrophy caused by disease.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 04:08:02 2013 No.5547413 >>5544131 with still how large semicon is, good luck with that. Probably in 20-30 years from the progress of semicon.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 04:12:17 2013 No.5547422 I am more interested in exploring universe than living together. Kinda feel sad that i live in the age where going to mars is still take a lot of time and effort.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 04:15:18 2013 No.5547429

>>5547374
i have the book right in front of me so i can explain it more clearly:
previous experiments on mice where the critters were fed with anti oxidants or genetically modified to produce more anti oxidants like catalase were unsuccesful.

however, in experiments where the animals were genetically modified to produce mitocondria targeted catalase, their maximum lifespan extented in 20%

there are THEORIES about why this happens, but still, that life extension technique is probably not practical, because it doesn't work on mice that are already born and other several reasons, mainly ethical ones

give me a minute and i will find the actual study

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 04:16:32 2013 No.5547433 >>5547422 if you find a way to live forever you will be able to live to see space travel, anon

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 04:43:32 2013 No.5547449 >>5547371 Implant into a fetus. It will just end up as a chimera at best, and stillborn at worst, plus all you've done there is clone yourself.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 04:45:33 2013 No.5547451 >>5547449 >chimera ofc, with a complete chromosome replacement....

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 04:53:32 2013 No.5547463 >>5547451 But still your not living forever, you've just cloned yourself.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 04:55:47 2013 No.5547467 >>5547451 Why not do it in an egg instead. At the fetus level seems impractical.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 04:56:48 2013 No.5547470 >>5547463 as long as my genes are expressed, the ability to have a healthy conscience, and an able body then i consider that "living" we mostly behave the way we do, and how our personality is shaped, from our genetics

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 04:57:48 2013 No.5547471 >>5542532 Philosophers' stone, bitches!

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 04:59:03 2013 No.5547476 >>5547467 because i'm an idiot, and it's late and i wanted to say an egg originally but couldn't come up with the word in time before i pressed submit

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 04:59:32 2013 No.5547477 >>5547470 >we mostly behave the way we do, and how our personality is shaped, from our genetics no

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 05:02:02 2013 No.5547482 >>5547470 Except no. You will die. A copy of you will live on. You might as well just have kids if you want your genes to continue on.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 05:05:33 2013 No.5547489 File: 159 KB, 2560x1600, 1359052890429.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] am i on /x/?

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 05:13:18 2013 No.5547497

>>5547482
why would i want to live in a body in which errors in dna replication propagate with age. all i have to do is publish my wisdoms, photos of a past life, give it fresh younger clone of me, and he'll have the essence of my life, culturally and genetically. that's living on forever.

recent studies show that our personalities are more derived from genetics than imagined before. look it up on google scholar

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 05:15:03 2013 No.5547500 >>5547497 Except it won't be YOU. You'll just be giving it all to a copy who will have your personality. A copy. Not you. Immortality is about fixing those errors in DNA replication.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 05:28:04 2013 No.5547508 >>5547500 How will it not be me? What differentiates me and the next body I see? My DNA sequence. Why should I worry about fixing DNA replication, when artificial cloning has already been accomplished?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 05:32:35 2013 No.5547515 >>5547508 not sure if troll or retard

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 05:36:47 2013 No.5547523 >>5547515 >can't give a valid response >call the person a troll and a retard

>>	transfer student F Wed Feb 20 06:20:17 2013 No.5547597 i'm working on it, but i'll probably die from unnatural causes first and leave my unfinished works to an idiot

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 06:26:18 2013 No.5547613 >>5547508 But it won't have YOUR consciousness, when you die, you will not be able to perceive yourself in the clone body.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 07:25:03 2013 No.5547710 I'm trying to simulate the known universe to perfection. Once my simulation is complete, I will run the simulation to a further point than the present and observe how the humans of the future develop immortality and space travel.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 07:52:03 2013 No.5547743 File: 4 KB, 126x116, 1334991177013.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5547710

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 08:18:33 2013 No.5547790 >>5547613 >consciousness >>>/x/

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 08:34:17 2013 No.5547821 >>5547790 OH BOY the scientific community has about the same amount of retards in cults

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 08:35:48 2013 No.5547828 >>5547821 Occultism and spiritualism are not compatible with scientific rationality.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 08:38:20 2013 No.5547835 >>5547828 i completly agree but if you are dumb enough to not understand the concept of consciousness (nobody's talking about ghosts, spirits and soul) you are fucking retarded

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 08:40:03 2013 No.5547843 File: 136 KB, 625x424, evidence.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5547835 A soul / consciousness has no measurable effects and isn't needed for any explanation.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 08:45:17 2013 No.5547848

>>5547843
>make exact clone of you and copy your memories to it, while both are still alive
>canno't understand the fact that this clone isn't you

how hard is it to grasp that concept? how blind and brainwashed you need to be to think you need the scientific method to understand that? the discussion here is life extension and OBVIOUSLY this matter is important in scientific terms.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 08:48:17 2013 No.5547857 >>5547848 A soul / consciousness is a dualist concept and entirely unscientific. It has no evidence and is irrelevant to scientific investigations. Please take your nonsense to >>>/x/. You're holding back scientific progress.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 09:16:48 2013 No.5547910

>>5547857
you are just as brainwashed as any cultist or religious person, you are clearly using the scientific method as a religion itself.

i bet you are the kind of person who thinks native american medicine has nothing to teach or that chinese medicine doesn't work despise experimentations saying otherwise, just because their model of explaining it makes no sense.

now that i sent your ass to toldstan, let me give you the education the state, your uni and maybe your parents weren't able to give you, since i'm feeling generous today:

you claimed:
>one concept has no measurable effect, therefore it's study isn't worth it

buoyancy and density could be considered unmeasurable by anyone before archimedes. you may think it's a simple concept because people simplified the idea for you, but to develop methods of measuring such things is a really amazing effort. the same goes for discovering the number of atoms in a piece of wood or measuring light intensity. those were considered unmeasurable by many before good scientists figured them out. there were retards like you that used to think that electro magnetic waves were hippie shit during the time they were discovered. therefore just because there are things that are apparently impossible to measure doesn't mean they aren't worth working on, even we fail to do so.

cont

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 09:18:34 2013 No.5547915 >>5547910 >misunderstanding... well, everything hoo boy

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 09:19:33 2013 No.5547920

>>5547910
that was your first mistake. your second mistake is to ignore a fact (which makes you, maybe not a person who lacks intelect, but certainly an ignorant) a concept even a child would be able to understand: in a simulated experiment where an exact copy of you (which includes memories, genetics and everything else) would be created and both of you would coexist. so, say i burned your copy with a cigarette. you wouldn't feel that burn. you wouldn't know exactly what your copy is thinking either. therefore, even though your clone is an EXACT copy of yourself, there's still something that separates you and such clone. what would you call that one unknown thing?

unlike you, i don't substitute faith for science, faggot

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 09:20:33 2013 No.5547924

>>5547910
>you are clearly using the scientific method as a religion itself.
My sides. Science is objective, unbiased, based on facts and open to criticism. Science is the opposite of religion.

>i bet you are the kind of person who thinks native american medicine has nothing to teach or that chinese medicine doesn't work
Pseudoscience and mysticism have no basis in reality and belong to >>>/x/

>buoyancy and density could be considered unmeasurable
Buoyancy and density have observable effects, moron. Your spirit nonsense on the other hand is by definition unobservalbe and untestable. If you want to believe in invisible demons, you are free to do so -- on >>>/x/. Please don't shit up our science board with irrational garbage.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 09:23:33 2013 No.5547930

>>5547920
Nice straw person. Copying is a physical process and a copy is a distinct physical object. Obviously a copy wouldn't be physically connected to my brain. This is an easily observable fact and has nothing to do with magical spirits / consciousness.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 09:46:33 2013 No.5547972

>>5547930
>>5547924

oh god
there's really no way to discuss with retards
it really feels like i'm discussing with a fanatic religious person, you are a complete joke, I pity your teachers if there's a remote possibility that you were accepted in an university

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 09:49:33 2013 No.5547978 >>5547972 >immature insults Why do you resort to low level personal attacks? Your nonsense has been disproved. Your "arguments" (read: fallacies) have been destroyed. You could just admit you were wrong or at least stop posting.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 10:02:48 2013 No.5548010

>>5547978
i'm stoping here, because, as I said, i'm not obligated to give you the education the state and your parents were unable to provide, it's not my responsibility showing you clinical studies, medicine history, scientific method and cite the whole discussion we had in the thread you obviously didn't read. it would be like discussing calculus with a 3 year old, or worse, a teenager who has poor education yet has the prepotency of thinking he knows everything.

i'd rather leave you being an ignorant and maybe, just maybe, learn by your own mistakes. my satisfaction is to know that, eventually you will discover facts you your academic life (i assume you aren't just a highschooler who watched too much carl sagan and tyrone on youtube) and you will remember this conversation, so you will either eat up your own shit or block the truth because it would hurt to know you've spent so many years being a retarded piece of shit, which means you will still be unsuccesful and ignorant in academic life. fun thing is that both possibilities satisfy me.

so please stop posting and shitting up a wonderful thread, if you still want to play "pretend to be scientist" and parrot quotes out of your ass, please go to /b/ so you can quote dawkins on "atheist vs theists" threads.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 10:10:33 2013 No.5548024

>>5548010
Again you didn't post any argument but only further insults. You posted anti-scientific /x/ nonsense and you got called out. No reason to be upset. This is a science board and if you -- for whatever emotional / dogmatic reason -- refuse to accept the scientific method, you are free to leave.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:07:05 2013 No.5548142

>>5548024
can you read?
>i'm stoping here, because, as I said, i'm not obligated to give you the education the state and your parents were unable to provide

i can't discuss chess moves if you don't even know how to play and i'm not willing to teach you so. not my responsiblity.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:09:19 2013 No.5548146

>>5548142
You are not in the position to teach me anything. You are a pseudo-intellectual high schooler who doesn't even know the scientific method. I corrected you several times ITT. You can stop replying now, if your only responses are childish insults. Go read a book.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:16:49 2013 No.5548156 >>5548146 d'aaaaawww baby's first insult! at least try to invent your own insults. you are so incopetent that even insulting is a chore for you.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:19:18 2013 No.5548160 >>5548156 At this point you're making it too obvious that you're underaged and not interested in any kind of intellectual discourse. Please go back to >>>/v/

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:21:34 2013 No.5548166

>>5548160
as I said, at least try to not copy the insults i used, you aren't going very far by doing that. look, i'm starting to feel bad for what i said since it seems you are actually mentally challenged, i'm sorry if you have down's syndrome or anything similar.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:24:04 2013 No.5548176 >>5548166 >Someone took apart his argument >Is now acting like a child >>>/x/

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:25:36 2013 No.5548181 >>5548166 Try harder, moron.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:27:33 2013 No.5548185 File: 16 KB, 460x276, Crying-Baby-001.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >MOM, SOMEBODY DISCOVERED I'M NOT REALLY IN AN UNIVERSITY AND THAT I JUST PARROT WHAT SCIENCE POPULARIZING PROGRAMS SAY!

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:31:04 2013 No.5548195 >>5548185 >>>/global/rules/6 >>>/global/rules/3 >>>/global/rules/2

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:33:06 2013 No.5548203 >>5548195 i should do the same for you, but instead of showing 4chan rules i should list a number of scientific/science history books. too bad i'm not your parents or your highschool teacher.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:34:50 2013 No.5548208

>>5548203
>i should list a number of scientific/science history books
Go ahead and do it. I highly doubt you ever read a real science textbook.

>too bad i'm not your parents or your highschool teacher.
I'm older than you and unlike you I finished high school.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:38:18 2013 No.5548220

>>5548208
hey, you are improving a bit, at least one of your insults aren't copied or repeated (apparently that's standard behaviour for parrots, right?)

i'm proud and amused, it's interesting to see that mentally challenged teenagers are still capable of learning, even in a really slow rate.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:40:05 2013 No.5548225 >>5548220 >still no arguments >still buttdevasted because his nonsense got disproved

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:43:19 2013 No.5548230 >>5548225 >still being retarded >still thinking we are in the same level to have an inteligent conversation >still thinking i'd have the pacience to teach a pretentious teenager the scientific method and tell tales of science history

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:44:19 2013 No.5548233 File: 245 KB, 3750x3750, 1338854822443.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >trolls trolling trolls

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:44:19 2013 No.5548234 >>5548230 You're lacking the education to understand the most fundamental concepts of science. Please educate yourself.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:45:34 2013 No.5548235 >>5548234 >the most fundamental concepts of science the what now?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:47:03 2013 No.5548238 File: 5 KB, 126x116, 1334991177013.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5548234 aren't you such a smartie guy? where did you learn those words?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:49:18 2013 No.5548252 >>5548235 Ever heard of the scientific method? >>5548238 You're probably not familiar with the idea of education. You should try it though. Go to school, read a book, educate yourself.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:51:34 2013 No.5548263 >>5548252 now this is getting boring you are just repeating the same thing over and over for a while how do you expect me to believe you aren't a a special kid if you can't even insult someone even if you try so hard?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:55:16 2013 No.5548278 >>5548263 Unlike you I'm here for serious discussion of science and math and not for infantile insults.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:56:16 2013 No.5548284 >>5548278 that's not what 20+ posts of broscience, insults, parroting and pretending to be retarded say, anon

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 11:58:16 2013 No.5548287 >>5548284 I explained why you were wrong. It isn't my fault that you cannot be thankful for a correction because you're too immature.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:02:17 2013 No.5548303 >>5548287 i explained why i don't have to waste my time teaching teenagers, it's not my fault i'm pursuing a bachelors degree and not licentiate degree

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:03:17 2013 No.5548308 >>5548303 And again your post was nothing but insults. Don't you have homework to do?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:04:17 2013 No.5548316 >>5548308 the irony in your post is quite amusing >inb4 "i was just pretending to be retarded!"

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:06:17 2013 No.5548321 >>5548316 Show me your argument. Oh wait, you have none. You're just wasting your time with pointless shitposting.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:09:17 2013 No.5548338 >>5548321 actually i'm having a nice time by insulting an extremely butthurt autistic kid who thinks science is a religion i'm enjoying myself

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:11:16 2013 No.5548345 >>5548338 >projecting

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:13:16 2013 No.5548352 >>5548345 >buzzwords what's next? are you going to post memes?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:16:17 2013 No.5548356 >>5548352 Do you want me to post memes? Is this le highest intellectual level you understand?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:19:19 2013 No.5548363 >>5548356 oh, now I understand why you are completly lost and barely understand basic concepts you lack reading comprehension don't study science before learning how to read, buddy, it's too complicated. find a good english teacher first

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:21:19 2013 No.5548370 >>5548363 >projecting again

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:22:33 2013 No.5548373 >>5548370 i'm begining to understand your tactic you want to bore me to death by saying the same stupid shit over and over aren't you

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:24:03 2013 No.5548378 >>5548373 >another projection

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:24:49 2013 No.5548377 I hope this is a samefag arguing with itself because otherwise you two would have to be fucking retarded.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:24:49 2013 No.5548381 >>5548378 aaaand point proven

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:25:48 2013 No.5548385 >>5548381 nope

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:29:03 2013 No.5548392 >>5548385 xDD

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:41:50 2013 No.5548420 >>5542600 we can do that now, actually. Ever tried heroin?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:46:34 2013 No.5548429 >>5548392 most intelligent post you made ITT

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:48:18 2013 No.5548431 >>5548429 thanks but i'm afraid to say you have zero posts that which definition is anywhere near to resemble the word "intelligence"

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:49:04 2013 No.5548433 >>5543995 if you need a good con artist, I'm here bro

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:50:04 2013 No.5548437 >>5548431 It's been several hours now and you're still upset over the fact that your fairy tale bullshit has been disproved. Please take your meds.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:53:33 2013 No.5548443
File: 24 KB, 287x399, kGgu6NJPqqU.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>5542532
Well, I am of dubious use to science as a reasercher, but as soon as I have a solid source of income, I am planning to invest everything up to the last spare cent into the increase of life's longevity. There's nothing I won't sacrifice for a functional immortality.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:54:03 2013 No.5548445 >>5548437 it's been several hours you are trying to convince me to teach you the basics i'm sorry you weren't accepted in a real uni, but i can't teach you all that stuff

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:56:18 2013 No.5548449 >>5548445 I am studying at an elite university. Stay mad and delusional, shitposter. You still have no idea what the scientific method is, do you?

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:56:33 2013 No.5548451

>>5548443
i'm with you, bro
in my case i've chosen to use my whole life and will to pursue this cause
but i don't think personal money would be able to finnance that kind of research
auber de grey said he needs at least 10 million A YEAR for 10 years to make any significant progress

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:57:34 2013 No.5548452 File: 89 KB, 600x450, 1357262037294.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5548449 >elite university

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 12:59:04 2013 No.5548456 >>5548452 >infantile cartoon

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:04:48 2013 No.5548468 >>5548456 >being autistic

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:06:21 2013 No.5548472 >>5548468 I don't know that feel.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:08:19 2013 No.5548475 >>5548472 as predicted, meme spouting retard

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:09:18 2013 No.5548479 >>5548475 I'm merely adjusting my posts to your level.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:11:18 2013 No.5548483 File: 9 KB, 400x224, stock-footage-little-boy-crying.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5548479 >i'm just pretending to be retarded! it's not like parrot quotes, memes, copy your insults and repeat retarded shit or anything!

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:13:49 2013 No.5548485 >>5548483 We all know you were not pretending.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:13:49 2013 No.5548487 >>5548485 >reading comprehension

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:14:33 2013 No.5548490
File: 395 KB, 1024x576, 1330357595_2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>5542552
I want to be immortal because this is the only I have a chance to find out if there is anything better that nonexistence after death. Otherwise, it is a leap of faith
>>5542727
I heard a theory that if every substructure of the brain was gradualy replaced by artificial elements (whithout ever shutting the brain down), eventually it is possible to achieve immortality of the brain, at the same time guaranteing that the resulting conciousness is exactly the same as before the procedure, not an ideal copy.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:16:33 2013 No.5548494 >>5548490 doing that to your brain is a leap of faith as well there's no way to prove you won't die and be replaced by a computer

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:16:33 2013 No.5548495 >>5548487 Exactly. That's the thing you're lacking.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:17:03 2013 No.5548497 >>5548495 >reading comprehension

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:18:19 2013 No.5548498 >>5548497 Congratulations, you recognized your problem. Now do something about it.

Lack of funding Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:20:48 2013 No.5548502
File: 315 KB, 1280x800, 1360957596783.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>5548451
That could be douable. Is this really a thing that longevity research is currently underfunded? I head that a few times, and this must be the most absurd things I have ever heard. What could be more imortant than extending your life?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:21:04 2013 No.5548503 >>5548420 Absinthe and Jagermeister does an even better job.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:23:19 2013 No.5548507 File: 20 KB, 240x200, 1360815815111.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5548498 i forgot you have to be extremely clear and precise with words when dealing with people with an IQ under 90

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:24:18 2013 No.5548510 File: 23 KB, 638x344, ghostshell.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5548494 That is why it is called a theory. And a vague one at that. I would very much prefer not to do such a thing unless there was no other option.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:25:03 2013 No.5548512 >>5548507 I'm already trying. Do I have to be more precise and clear? Do you understand what I'm writing?

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:28:34 2013 No.5548514

>>5548502
there are several things that cause this:

skeptcism. people think such things are too good to be possible or science fiction stuff
belief that aging and death is natural and that it should be accepted.
'life extension" is disregarded and people prefer to fund geriatrics researching instead, which, i believe doesnt have the right approach to increase lifespan or to improve quality of life of the eldery
and, maybe the most important one, fear. MAYBE there are big researches on the subject going on for years, but any findings would be kept in secret for obvious reasons. say someone discovers the secret to never aging, what do you think that would happen?

>>5548512
ok, now be quiet, adults are talking

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:30:04 2013 No.5548520 >>5548514 That post was full of underaged pseudo-intellectualism. Do you have any education at all? You're spouting edgy garbage without any intellectual content.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:31:04 2013 No.5548522 >>5548520 i asked you to be quiet, sweetie, we are having a serious discussion here

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:32:36 2013 No.5548526

>>5548522
YOU are not having any discussion because you lack the intellectual capacities to comprehend anything that goes beyond spouting edgy buzzwords you regurgitate from r<span class="math">[/spoiler]eddit or youtube pop sci videos. How old are you?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:33:33 2013 No.5548527 >>5548526 ok super nanny said we should ignore kids when they ask for attention like that, sorry little guy but that's for your own good

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:35:34 2013 No.5548532 >>5548527 How old are you? What's your level of education?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:36:18 2013 No.5548535 so for the scientific method dude: if you have an identical twin and you die first, do you then begin to experience life through your twin? how is this any different from cloning yourself in an attempt to prolong your life?

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:37:49 2013 No.5548537

>>5542732
>>5542719
>>5546724
this really brings up the question of whether or not it is truly even immortality at all. Maybe to those around you, to have your likeness preserved and continuing to live. But it seems to me that copying your brain wouldn't serve to preserve your consciousness. You would die and be gone just business as usual, but your likeness would live on in your place. The scary part is that no one would know but you. You'd be dead but be regarded as cheating death. If your brain was replaced with a virtual copy of your brain, you'd come out of the operating room as more or less a very complex automaton, but in reality you died during the operation.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:38:33 2013 No.5548539 >>5548535 That question doesn't make any sense. "You" are your (physical) body. When the physical body is dead it cannot experience anything anymore. >>5548537 >consciousness Magical soul garbage goes to >>>/x/. /sci/ is a science board.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:39:49 2013 No.5548545 >>5548535 >>5548537 >dualists >on my science board Get the fuck out.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:40:03 2013 No.5548546

>>5548537
there's still what this anon said
>>5548490
say you can link neurons to a computer (which is already possible) and instead of just giving commands to the computer, you actually use it's processor to think. it's easy to imagine you wouldn't die because of that.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:41:03 2013 No.5548547 >>5548539 I'm not talking about the soul here buddy. If your physical brain dies, then you're dead. A simulation of you is not you. Just as a recording of a voice is not a voice. Although they sound the same.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:41:18 2013 No.5548549
File: 484 KB, 1024x576, 1330357608_4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>5548514

>say someone discovers the secret to never aging, what do you think that would happen?

That is a most intriguing question. No matter how will the immortality be achieved, the revelation that it is not impossible will eclipse almost any discovery in human history, it will probably change our view of the world at least as much as the Heliocentric theory or discovery of the steam engine and it's ramifications.
At the very least, reproduction of those with acsess to the technology will drop to near-zero.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:41:49 2013 No.5548552 >>5548547 just ignore him, he can't grasp such a basic concept

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:42:35 2013 No.5548553 >>5548552 We're friends now.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:43:19 2013 No.5548554

>>5548547
What the fuck are you talking about? Stop blubbering irrelevant trivialitites and make an actual point.

>>5548552
Are you mentally deficient? Or why do you consider tautological banalities to be difficult concepts? Do you have any education at all? Please answer the questions.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:44:18 2013 No.5548556 >>5548539 this thread is about immortality. if your definition of immortality is that your specific dna sequence survives then you can already do that by tossing some of your hair into a tube and throwing it into liquid nitrogen.

>>	None !!BJiYgff8zf2 Wed Feb 20 13:44:18 2013 No.5548557 >>5548514 >>5548549 Sexual reproduction would become obsolete

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:46:04 2013 No.5548562 >>5548556 Immortality is a childish pipe dream. Do you even biology?

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:46:33 2013 No.5548565

>>5548549
it would certainly be an huge chaos and i'm sure our society isn't ready to handle that

also, for your inquires about why there's little (openly admitted) funding to that kind of research, see this guy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgLRhxvRlKg

i'm skeptical about his aproaches, i'm currently reading his book, but he's certainly the most obsessed scientist with the subject i've seem so far

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:48:04 2013 No.5548570 >>5548556 And what is YOUR definition of immortality? The survival of a magical soul? Don't make me laugh. Dualism goes to >>>/x/

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:48:49 2013 No.5548569

>>5548554
Okay, let me try again. Simple terms here.

My brain is part of my body. My brain is where all the synapses that form my likeness exist. If this is destroyed, or shut down, I've experienced death. I have died. A copy of this information in synthetic form could theoretically some day exist, but this would not stop me from experiencing death once my brain has shut down.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:49:04 2013 No.5548571 >>5548569 don't do it man, it will be like trying to explain things to a door that cries and whines

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:49:34 2013 No.5548576
File: 62 KB, 1024x576, aap.sized.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Can we please stop arguing, using image macros and insulting each other?
I might be new to this board, but I thought it "science" in it's name, that should probably imply some kind of rational discussion.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:50:03 2013 No.5548579 >>5548569 What's your point? You can say the same irrelevant tautologies about any object. A piece of paper can be copied and the original can be burnt. So what? You're not making any point.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:50:34 2013 No.5548580

>>5548562
if thats your opinion then why even post in this thread? it seems like all you've done in this thread is try to make yourself feel smart by throwing around the phrase "scientific method" and dismissing consciousnesses (which has to be discussed regardless of merit if you're going to talk about the possibility of biological immortality) while contributing nothing to the discussion.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:51:19 2013 No.5548582 >>5548580 This is a science board. If you want to discuss dualism and spirituality, then do it on >>>/x/.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:52:05 2013 No.5548585 >>5548570 no one in this thread has said anything about a "soul" except you.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:52:33 2013 No.5548587 >>5548579 Okay, point is, although you would be perceived as immortal by those around you, and a copy of you could continue to roam the earth and do your bidding, you won't know anything about it. Seeing as how you died.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:53:48 2013 No.5548593 >>5548579 he is though. you simply choose to ignore it because addressing it wouldn't allow you to continue ranting about how souls aren't real despite the fact that you are the only one bringing it up.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:54:33 2013 No.5548595 >>5548587 That is a little bit paifully obvious.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:56:50 2013 No.5548597

>>5548585
At least one poster ITT has been talking about a soul / consciousness several times. Such nonsense belongs on >>>/x/

>>5548587
How is this a point? A copy is not the original, obviously. There is no deeper insight in your post. Is this your highest cognitive level? Then you are officially retarded.

>>5548593
I was not the one bringing up soul / consciousness bullshit.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:58:19 2013 No.5548605 >>5548595 >>5548593 >>5548587 >>5548585 i warned you guys try to ignore him and he might go away

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 13:59:18 2013 No.5548608 >>5548605 >"Try to ignore rationality" Is that what you're saying? Seriously? On a science board?

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:03:34 2013 No.5548621

>>5548597
people have brought up the concept of consciousness sure, but it seems like they were using it to describe continued perception. they brought it up because your DNA sequencce fetus idea has nothing to do with "immortality" as it is being discussed in this thread

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:05:19 2013 No.5548626 >>5548621 Again: If you want to discuss dualism and spiritualism, then please do it on >>>/x/. Soul / consciousness nonsense is unscientific.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:06:19 2013 No.5548629 File: 44 KB, 640x539, retardedparrot.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5548626

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:07:04 2013 No.5548630 >>5548629 >>>/an/

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:07:04 2013 No.5548631

>>5548597
Okay, there it is, that's my point. That's what I'm trying to get across here. Let me go a little deeper.

When you have died, you start the phase called, non-existence. Then you do that forever. It's called death. Simple enough yes?

Recap what we've got so far.
1. you die
2. eternal blackness.

Alright. So this thread is about how to stop that from happening. Someone mentioned the idea of digital copies of the mind or atleast synthetic copies as a means of achieved this goal.

I brought up the point that although the copy would now exist, you still experienced death.

So recap again:
1.you die
2.eternal blackness
3. meanwhile, advanced copy continues to live in your place.

THIS^^^ =/= IMMORTALITY

that's my point.

it's not immortality,
because you died.

It's really very simple.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:07:33 2013 No.5548632 >>5548626 who's discussing spirituality? what people seem to want to discuss is indefinite life extension. your initial idea is literally just cloning yourself, which has nothing to do with anything.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:08:03 2013 No.5548634 ITT: >make thread about immortality >anons dicuss immortality >go to bed >wake up >trolls Good god, you trolling is worse than /b/. At least they try

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:09:33 2013 No.5548642

>>5548631
That's trivially obvious. Such an insight requires no higher cognitive functions.

>>5548632
>who's discussing spirituality?
You are. You are assuming the existence of magical souls.

>your initial idea is
I didn't present any idea. I entered the thread to make clear that this is a science board and not /x/.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:12:34 2013 No.5548647 >>5548642 Alright, then it looks like we agree. I've been trying to find different ways to express this simple thought that I originally presented on a whim anyway.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:15:04 2013 No.5548653

>>5548642
>You are. You are assuming the existence of magical souls.
lolwut? when did I do this? I'm not even the poor guy that initally mentioned "conceiousness" that you trolled until he abandoned the thread.

>I didn't present any idea. I entered the thread to make clear that this is a science board and not /x/.
so why are you responding to my posts then? I didn't even mention the word "consciousness" until you decided to include me in your trolling. I addressed my question to the guy that posted that cloning idea.

Public appeal Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:17:18 2013 No.5548658

>>5548565
That's guite a beard.
That reminds me that regardless of all attempts to popularise science and thus attract more people and investments, scientific community often still has a rather creepy public image.
Anyone could buy good clothes and, well, shave, it but not the most intelligent and creative people on the planet. Simple as it may be, most researchers never do that. If they did, I think this could really help science on the long turn.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:17:50 2013 No.5548657 >>5548653 Why do you even bother replying, if all you do is calling me a "troll"?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:19:20 2013 No.5548668 >>5548657 because I thought I was arguing with the cloning guy, not the self appointed arbiter of what is and isn't appropriate subject matter on /sci/. guess I'll stop bothering though.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:19:20 2013 No.5548669 >>5548657 niggers

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:20:19 2013 No.5548672 >>5548668 So you're telling me that you are too cognitively impaired to follow a linear dicussion?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:21:19 2013 No.5548674 >>5548669 Tsk.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:23:04 2013 No.5548681 >>5548674 The fact that you even bothered to respond to that confirms that you are a troll

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:24:05 2013 No.5548683 >>5548681 non sequitur

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:32:34 2013 No.5548719
File: 57 KB, 800x432, 1327194001_1327176956u-2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>5548681
>>5548674
>>5548672
>>5548669
>>5548668
>>5548657
>>5548653
Why don't we just drop this idea about the brain dying during a "consciousness transfer". It's an old beat-up concept, and honestly I see no way of proving or disproving the host's survival of the process.
At this stage of scientific development I see no more way to prove or disprove the concept as there is no way to prove or disprove existance of a deity.
And insults are just petty.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:41:04 2013 No.5548749

>>5546922
I'm with you, only reason I'm in science is to study methods for prolonging life for as long as possible. I'm studying nanotechnology, since I believe the most potential for achieving something like that lies in the ability to manipulate the human body at very precise levels, among a plethora of other medical breakthroughs. It'll take a combined effort between scientists of all disciplines.

Have you read Aubrey de Grey's book? It's got a lot of interesting theories and roadmaps for telomere research, among other things. His talks and lectures are good to watch, even though the man is a bit eccentric and can at times not be very articulate in his delivery.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:56:18 2013 No.5548802

really intrested in this topic.
I advise googling "Dr. Bill Andrews" and prof. David Sinclair, They have a couple of videos on youtube and seem to be the most prominent figures in the field.

Aubrey De Grey liooks kind of strange,
and yes, what can I do to help when I finish my degree in commerce?)

Hope this thread lives till morning, 3 am here(siberian fag)

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 14:57:18 2013 No.5548807 ITT: two twelve year olds argue on the internet. Where are the mods? This was a good thread before these two failures showed up.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 15:01:49 2013 No.5548821 File: 83 KB, 389x291, 136_389x292.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5548749 >>5548802 >tfw everybody mocks de grey just because he's a druid come on, /sci/, don't you believe in druids?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 15:03:34 2013 No.5548830 File: 8 KB, 302x216, Ingsoc.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5548807 The more I think about this, the less appealing the concept of anymousity is to me, at least in the place like /sci/. All it does is breed more shitposters and trolls.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 15:05:04 2013 No.5548832 Buy the way you think this is achievable this century? with all the technology we have IDONTWANNADIE

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 15:09:50 2013 No.5548843 File: 37 KB, 520x360, 1361379215944.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>5548821 see >>5548658

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 16:09:18 2013 No.5549034 >>5548832 50/50 chance, according to de grey. We're either going to be the first generation to benefit from this or the last to die. Worst case scenario, look into cryonics if you got the money.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 16:15:04 2013 No.5549051

>>5548830
If there was effective moderation it wouldnt be so bad. ie, bans for shit posters. Sure there are ways around it, but its better than nothing.

Not to mention, our self-appointed savior who will save all threads from the mention of consciousness... by shiposting.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 16:16:33 2013 No.5549053 Why does anyone think it is a good idea to achieve immortality before planetary colonization? Unless it's insane expensive.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 16:53:22 2013 No.5549202 >>5549196 Name one measurable effect.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 16:53:37 2013 No.5549196 >>5547790 Are you trying to imply consciousness doesn't exist? It's not physically measurable, but you can measure it's effects and what is and is not conscious. a rock isn't conscious, but a human is.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 17:00:33 2013 No.5549217

>>5549202

A rock doesn't know it's a rock, it will never it's a rock, and is completely incapable of knowing it's a rock.

A human can.

Also, for the record I am in no way implying that consciousness is dualistic, consciousness is a product of the brain.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 17:02:18 2013 No.5549224 >>5549217 What does knowledge have to do with a soul / consciousness? Knowledge is physically stored.

Anonymous Wed Feb 20 17:05:34 2013 No.5549239

>>5549224

I never said the soul / consciousness were in anyway the same.

Consciousness is the quality or state of being aware of an external object or something within oneself.[1][2] It has been defined as: subjectivity, awareness, sentience, the ability to experience or to feel, wakefulness, having a sense of selfhood, and the executive control system of the mind

A soul is generally considered to be an immortal, ineffable spiritual component of a human being.

They are not the same thing and neither is knowledge, knowledge goes hand in hand with consciousness but is not neccesarily the same thing.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 17:08:03 2013 No.5549244 >>5549239 >It has been defined as: subjectivity, awareness, sentience, the ability to experience or to feel, wakefulness, having a sense of selfhood In other words: untestable pseudoscience and spiritualism nonsense. Please take it to >>>/x/

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 17:18:54 2013 No.5549275 >>5549244 You again? Get Out Troll! >>>/b/ Learn to read idiot.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 17:25:53 2013 No.5549300 >>5549275 Everything I said was correct. Try harder, /x/tard.

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 17:42:54 2013 No.5549347 Hey, at least i don't shitpost with memes. >>5549239 Hey, if i promise to accept your gods, baptise and sacrifice a really big sheep in your name, will you leave, pretty please?

>>	Anonymous Wed Feb 20 18:56:20 2013 No.5549539 >>5548830 OP here. I agree with you. This was a good discussion and then two trolls from /b/ bumped this thread to auto sage.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/sci/ - Science & Math