3 ms·
Umm, and remember there's no convincing reason to believe cryogenics work. Sure, we've cooled down some animals and brought them back. But keeping a head near
by wjy 18y ago
Umm, and remember there's no convincing reason to believe cryogenics work. Sure, we've cooled down some animals and brought them back. But keeping a head near absolute zero for years, and expecting to revive a consciousness? No evidence for it. None.
- JulianMorrison 18y agoThere are no revivals yet. That's expected - it isn't evidence. If you can't examine the facts, can you examine the theory? What is the theory? There's two I know of: biological revival, and informational "upload". The first sounds dubious to me - there's an awful lot of damage to repair, and the nanotech to do it is not even on the drawing board, let alone the knowledge to guide repair. The second sounds much more achievable based on some sort of slice, dice, scan and digitize process, followed by computer emulation. (See recent work by Anders Sandberg.) What would be required for upload? Continuity of information. (Continuity of the potential for biological life is NOT required.) Do we have evidence for continuity of information? We know that vitrification tech has gotten pretty good recently. (Wikipedia: a rabbit kidney was vitrified, thawed, and worked.) That suggests enough information could be preserved for upload. Conclusion: there is convincing reason to believe cryonics should work.