[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 210 KB, 500x480, membrane.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5866576 No.5866576 [Reply] [Original]

When will scientists halt and even reverse biological aging, allowing us to live hundreds and maybe thousands of years?

Cause I kinda like life

>> No.5866581

>>5866576

>wishes for immortality
>science can't even cure acne or explain its causes

heheh

>> No.5866582

>>5866576
>scientists
>biological

Pick one

>> No.5866586

What merit is there in keeping people alive for hundreds or thousands of years?

Aside from assuaging their fear of death.

>> No.5866588

>>5866582
>biology isn't and cannot be a core science studied by scientists.

shiggy diggy

>> No.5866590

>>5866581
Fuck

>>5866586
None, I just want it for my own selfish end, isn't that what America is about?

>> No.5866598

>>5866582
This sort of statement would apply better to social scientists.

>> No.5866599
File: 38 KB, 800x800, 1327352254550.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5866599

>> No.5866601

Just move to another planet.

>> No.5866607

>>5866599
Chem is mathematically rigorous?

>> No.5866615

>>5866607
Pretty sure he is trolling since neither physics or chemistry are rigorous.

>> No.5866629

>>5866599
Complex Systems = Biology = Mathematically Rigorous
>>5866576
Ageing is differentiation, yet it is detrimental development to the organism. Once humans understand how to work within biological systems and alter protein structure we can begin to work on aging.

>> No.5866632

>>5866586
Is there merit in letting people age and lose function?

>> No.5866655

Do something your proud of and make your name echo for eternity.. Then maybe you wont fear the solace embrace of death.

>> No.5866687

Goddamn, look at all these bio haters.

It seems pretty improbable that we'll ever, at least within several decades, or even centuries, have a firm enough grasp of genetics and modification techniques to have a viable "cure" for aging. Much more likely that we'll undergo a technological singularity, nail neural interfaces, and upload ourselves.

>> No.5866813

>>5866687
It's not like we have to understand everything right? Just enough to delay the inevitable. Like using regenerative medicine to replace old organs.

>> No.5866945

>>5866632
Yes. It renews the species, keeps it young.
Look at how set in their ways the average person over 40 is. Can you imagine a world where the majority of politicians - hell, the majority of VOTERS - are hundreds or even thousands of years old? We'd suffocate, intellectually and culturally.

>> No.5866953

>>5866576
you should try to overcome your fear of death

>> No.5866959

>>5866953
+1 embrace

>> No.5866969

>>5866945
Eternal youth doesnt mean everyone will be grouchy and stubborn.
It could mean the opposite. If the brain can retain the adaptability and plasticity of youth then every generation would be exactly like the youth of today rather than like the baby boomers.

>> No.5866972

>>5866953
>>5866959
So deep

>> No.5866989

>>5866969
Or we could continue the usual way of keeping minds plastic (and to keep society changing): producing new ones, while old ones die.

I have yet to see an argument for life extension/immortality that ultimately doesn't just boil down to "I don't want to die".

>> No.5866992

>>5866989
It takes 20+ years for a new child to become fully useful, that is a lot of wasted time.

>> No.5866994

>>5866989
But birthrates are declining, and old people are taking longer to die. This trend is only going to increase as poorer countries get richer thanks to technology advancement and free education.

So this "usual" way of keeping minds plastic is slowly failing

>> No.5867015

>>5866989
more to the point, we will make new ones with biotechnology, processors to think faster, memory chips etc. We're kinda like highly advanced bio-computers anyway and theres an abundance of study subjects for us to learn how we think and store memories, then we just improve ourselves through technology

tl;dr technology == human evolution

>> No.5867018

>>5866989
>>5867015
we dont really have a reason to die anymore, if we need to we can make gmc to feed masses but agelessness really just unlocks the stars. I think it would be totally acceptable for, when someone takes the agelessness thing, they have to be sterilzed until we find another planet to avoid gross overpopulation

>> No.5867095

>>5866992
>wasted time
Yea, because childhood is wasted time. It stops us from pursuing the ultimate goal in life which was... oh no! I forgot the meaning and purpose of life?
Please remind me as how we can waste our time.

>> No.5867152

>>5866632
Gives people who don't exist yet a chance to exist.

Immortality would mean no need for reproduction. In fact, it would mean reproduction would probably not even be allowed anymore, unless you actually let yourself die for your child to live.

>> No.5867165

>>5866586
Continuity. Humans will be able to achieve much more if they can set themselves a project that will last hundreds or thousands of years

>> No.5867175

>>5867152
Do we really want to start gving rights to things that don't exist?

>> No.5867199

>>5866989
how about "I want to live and enjoy life for as long as i can"

glass is half full bro

>> No.5867202

>>5866576

There are people working on that. It's just a rather complex field to which there is likely no single "magic bullet".

>> No.5867205

>>5867202
How about digitizing your brain? That's a potential "magic bullet", quite a famous one in fact

>> No.5867209

>>5866576
There's always gonad ablation to increase longevity. Or rapamycin....

>> No.5867212

How about grow up like any normal person and accept the fact that you're gonna die some day? Ever thought about that?

>> No.5867217

>>5867165
This. I'd also say that people will think more about long term consequences of their decisions if they are going to be living for thousands of years.

>> No.5867220

>>5867212
>Implying extended lifespan = immortality

>> No.5867233
File: 366 KB, 1405x1405, aubrey_de_grey.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5867233

Is this guy to be trusted at all?

>> No.5867235

>>5867212
How about you stop posting?

>> No.5867251

>>5867212
fuck you I'll be keith richards X10

>> No.5867898

>>5867233
yes
sort of
he's correct that advances in medicine will advance your age gradually, so you'll live till 90 when you're 70, 110 when you're 80, 240 when you're 90 ect.
there's no real way to know how fast those advances will come, or if you were born too soon to "catch the life train"

>> No.5867934 [DELETED] 

>>5866576

>> No.5868001

Interesting to ponder what would happen if (likely when) we are able to do this. How will we deal with the insane population boom? Only allowed to have kids every so often or something like superman where natural birth all but disappears.

>> No.5868023

Oh fuck we'd be like the elves. I want to be an elf...

>> No.5868062

You'll probably live to see it if you're fairly young.

You better hope to fuck you're extremely rich, otherwise you won't be getting it.

>> No.5868096

>>5866576
>Immortality discovered
>no one dies
>overpopulation
>Economic crysis (i don't think you understand how much it costs to the government to support old hags)
>Spirits of nature angry at us because we altered balance

Congratulations at screwing up everything, faggot

>> No.5868102

>>5866813

Replacing your brain would essentially mean killing you.

>> No.5868104

>>5868096
huur duur how about people save for their own retirement? I know scary thought right?

>> No.5868109

>>5867095

top lel

>> No.5868111

>>5868104
That won't appease the angry Nature spirits, though

>> No.5868114

>denying your unborn children any chance of life
>not refreshing the gene pool like nature does

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTKedyQQkZQ

>> No.5868119

>>5866576
Wouldn't it get boring after a while?
Think about it, you are 800 years old or even more, what would be left for you to do?

>> No.5868128

>>5868119

Shitpost on /sci/ and /tv/.

>> No.5868130

>>5868111
people need to save for retirement instead of relying on the government. Angry nature spirits don't exist but if you're paranoid enough I guess you could be one of the few people to reproduce.

>> No.5868131

>>5868114
I love Ali G

>> No.5868175

>>5866576
i think if scientist could research things without bullshit of liberals, it would go faster. but no that would be inhumane. aaah Josef Mengele.

>> No.5868200

I am sure i will eventually get around to doing something worthwhile after 500 years or so.

>> No.5868214

>>5868175
As if to imply conservative christian nutjobs are any more likely to let it slide.

>> No.5868222

The problem with immortality is that it'll come with a huge wave of eugenics that will probably highly unethical. You can't let everyone live forever, no matter how much you try. And making someone immortal is literally saying their life is too valuable to be lost from aging.

I do think it has a use, though. Imagine if Einstein, Euler or Turing were alive today? Their minds still as fresh as they were during their time? Can you imagine how much farther we could progress as a species? It would be absurd.

>> No.5868492

>>5868001
Poor families won't be able to afford it and rich families weren't driving population growth anyway.

>> No.5869030 [DELETED] 

>>5866576

>> No.5869610
File: 39 KB, 559x598, 1372488588454.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5869610

>>5868096
>no one dies
People will still die idiot, accidents and disease still exist last time I checked.

>overpopulation
The only reason women have babies now is either they are white trash or are getting old and want to squeeze a baby in before menopause. If no one grew old then women could focus on their careers without the impeding doom of menopause. Regardless, it's only the poor countries that are contributing to overpopulation these days.

>>Economic crysis (i don't think you understand how much it costs to the government to support old hags)
If people never grew old, there would be no more old hags for the government to retire. Therefore the government could save money if society never aged.

>> No.5869779
File: 611 KB, 960x1299, 1346433795497.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5869779

>>5867212
>How about grow up like any normal person and accept the fact that you'll starve if the rains don't come this year?
>How about grow up like any normal person and accept the fact that drinking water will give you diseases?
>How about grow up like any normal person and accept the fact that your livestock will be eaten by wolves?
>How about grow up like any normal person and accept the fact that half your children will die before the age of 10?