db1a56 No.165
What is /th/'s opinion on cryonics?
It seems to me like it should work - that even if your brain is scrambled quite a bit, everything is still there, so if you can figure out how the scrambling process works with nanometer accuracy (which requires supercomputers far beyond current capabilities, but there's no rule future supercomputers can't be the size of planets), and determine the location of molecules down to the angstrom (which we currently can't do for large objects which have to stay below 200K, but there's no physical law against it), you should be able to figure out what the brain looked like before it got scrambled, and recover the person.
2d0cb4 No.166
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
The whole point of good cryo is that the brain is not scrambled. Everything is kept exactly in place. That's why we freeze stuff, in general.
3fcf94 No.170
>>165>you can figure out how the scrambling process works with nanometer accuracyI'm not as sure as you here.
World is undeterministic on quantum level, and we can demonstably scale those effects up to our level with no problems. It's very likely that this quantum uncertainty will manifest itself in scramvling during freezing process, so your planet-sized supercomputer will only be able to estimate the best guess with x amount of percents.
c5f4e9 No.180
I've heard plastination/vitrification is a better option for preservation. Ice kills vital, irrecoverable nerve cells.
In the end though cryo is as much a gamble as an afterlife, or any kind of immortal, immaterial soul. I'm pretty sure your nerve cells wouldn't continue consciousness as you know it.
It's a bit of a mindfuck but this blog post explained better than I possibly could:
http://waitbutwhy.com/2014/12/what-makes-you-you.html bdc7c5 No.199
>>170That's not true. The world is absolutely deterministic on the quantum level. Someone sold you the copenhagen lie!
852d76 No.217
It's a quaint idea, but I don't think there's anything to it. In theory it should work, but the technology just isn't there yet, and without having the thawing/reviving portion of the concept working yet - we have no idea what preparatory steps may prove crucial to it's success, thus there's little chance of success in the near future. It's currently just an excuse for a company to dupe rich fools into paying hyper-inflated fees for freezer space.
2d0cb4 No.218
>>217What's the alternative, dying without any chance at all of waking up later?
8c2117 No.235
Brains are full of water.
Water expands when it freezes.
Every single cell is cut to ribbons by expanding ice crystals.
Any chef and verify the difference between fresh and previously frozen meat.
Possible fix: Keep the brain frozen, trickle just enough current through it to make a "map" of all the neural circuits it had then load that information into either a cloned brain or a machine.
Once frozen the original brain is mush.
8c2117 No.236
>>235Also, nanobots.
You could have an army of tiny robots sew up all shredded cell membranes but it would almost be easier to use them to build a whole new brain from scratch.
f51656 No.240
>>170>World is undeterministicStopped reading there. But if I did read on, I would point out that quantum mechanics is a highly theoretical field, whose proponents are constantly busying themselves looking for proof of their extremely convenient hypothesis to explain incongruities which have presented themselves in the altogether tangential and pseudoscientific framework of other theories which have led to their conclusions.
You mentioned something about amounts of percentages; I hope you don't believe that probabilities are things that exist in the real world.
2d0cb4 No.242
>>240Then do the dual-slit experiment yourself, asshat.
ec1114 No.244
>>236Yeah, but then you'd be dead, replaced by a phony copy of you that thinks it's you because it has a copy of your memories.
bbbf5f No.261
>>244Thats irrelevant and makes the false assumption that there is something that makes you, you. Consciousness is simply a tool
8c2117 No.264
>>261> Consciousness is simply a toolSo are you.
Sorry, I just love doing that.
Of course what make you you is your memories, the way you process information and so on but this is a philosophical question that is going to need some attention.
>Billionaire Joe gets in an accident and comes out of the operating room XX% carbon fiber and silicon. Do his kids inherit? >Jim uploads himself as a backup and then gets alzheimer's. The backup takes him to court claiming to be the "real" Jim because the original can't even remember his own name. And so on.
I don't think that even the current legal definition of "person" will hold up much longer.