E.g. would you approach it from the 'immortal jellyfish' perspective, from cell regeneration, 'transporting' into an earlier version, transfer of the mind, etc.?
Instead of spending all our time in the shadow of mortality why not we just step out in the light and enjoy life in its brief moment and make the most of it?
Don't get me wrong, I would like to live forever, but it might have greater risks for mankind then the benefits it holds.
I also think for society to evolve older generations need to die off. Peoples worldview becomes partially fixed in their youth, and for some it is entirely fixed in their youth. I wouldn't want to live with a bunch of geriatrics from the 1800's.
b) why would there even be a discussion on 'who deserves' to be immortal? is there currently a discussion on who deserves to live based on what they contribute to society? crime would still be crime, and dealt with as it's always been dealt with
c) let's distinguish between mortality based on aging and mortality based on other unforeseeable causes ( violence, accidents, etc. )
d) mortality currently binds us to our solar system, and humanities' possible ultimate demise
e) we are at a stage where human evolution has stopped. the way to push it forward is now through our own means
my question was rather related to the technical issue - as it is a technical issue. not if it's desireable or not; that's besides the point and has to be dealt with separately
b)Mortality gives way to other minds to step forward like Stephen Hawking and others. Would have been such a good thing to have an immortal Isaac Newton for a millennia? Would have he realised the the laws of physics outside of earth's standards. Could have an immortal Einstein refine his theories and change his mistakes and adapt to newer findings? Could have had a Stephen Hawking any chance to share his knowledge beside immortal Einsteins and Newtons?
c)It is a discussion about who deserves it. As for expensive treatments which aren't affordable by anyone in our society right now. We all now this. These treatments or solutions won't be free of charge. Only the rich will afford it. You know, money talks...
d)It's not only mortality that binds us to earth. It's our whole biological build up. Which fits only the life on earth. What about the warp drive, worm holes, etc... These aren't good enough for humanity to reach for the stars?
e)Also we don't have any clue about what effects it will have on the human body to live on another planet.
f)It is silly to say that evolution has stopped for the human race. We are biological creatures which can adapt to its surrounding as any other. But having immortality and not producing offsprings will actually lead to an evolutionary dead end. Having no genetic mutation will prevent the species to create natural immunity against diseases etc...
g)I only wanted to point out that maybe it is not the best thing to cheat death. It is natural. It's not a disease. Stop treating it like one.
As I said. As we are concerned about A.I., so should we concerned about this as well. Logic dictates to examine a possible solution from every angle as possible. Not to put ourselves and the whole humanity into a dead end.
It is about looking at mortality as some kind of disease and not a common thing that happens to all living beings.
As a human, I am afraid of death as the most of us. I like to toy with the idea living forever, or at least hundreds of years...
But looking at our society now. As the average lifespan getting higher, more people stay in jobs longer as usual. The young wont have any jobs, because their parent will stay in the positions. In the end the old would have to sustain the young and soon after that, no one would want to have a child, because who needs another hungry mouth.
Of course as the 1st world country citizens will afford living a longer life, 2nd and 3rd ones wont. This will create a massive gap between nations. Like we didn't have that already.
And we don't know how the human mind could handle this anyway. Maybe you would go actually mad after 200 years of living.
And as I said. The extra years always add up to the end. Maybe you live 200 years, but 2/3 of that is spent being old and useless.
As highly appreciated and acknowledged people warn us about the ramifications of A.I., so we should be extremely cautious about banning death.
To be honest I would be less afraid of A.I. as the consequences of immortality.
RE: Baculovirus, have you seen any attempts at this?
What I'm wondering about the different approaches is if they could receive bigger breakthroughs by sharing / crowdsourcing their issues and getting a wider attraction / reach. E.g. sometimes the answers to a problem lie in another industry
Like e.g. the fold.it game helped decyphering the crystal structure of an AIDS causing virus in 10 days, while scientists were battling it for 15 years
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V48M5j-6zdE
and
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbYgza4NNk8
To name some of the top roadblocks:
- Cellular garbage collection
- Inner-workings of Mitochondria and cell death/apoptosis at the wrong time.
- DNA repair genes
- Telomerase production/use
Analyzing genomic pathways associated to these is key. Understanding why the expression of genes varies or decreases/increases at the wrong time is also key.
Being able to use Cogntive computing/biomicry/AI/Machine Learning etc to analyze the hidden connections and relationships between phytochemicals, genes, proteins, pathways and environment is the next frontier.
We're working on it and could certainly use additional crowdsourcing approaches.
We can then truly solve for space travel and populating other planets and we'll have lifespans that enable us to travel for extended periods of time - a Universal requirement for the human species.
Re: The Nematode lifespan; What happened to the C60 buckyballs diet? Apparently rats that underwent a specific diet of C-60 fluids had nearly double the lifespan ( 22-26months vs 42 months ) http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0142961212...
Yes, we are almost there and I don't think people realize how close we are. Make the world a better place? How about making the Universe/Multiverse a better place!
Forget immortality through the extension of the biological life of the body; yonder lies folly.
However yes, that would be a much faster approach to space colonisation - it would remove the need for spaceships.
Sure, "immortality" in humans would present a variety of potential problems, but new technologies often do. Should we not have created cars, planes, nuclear power, etc. because of the risks we foresaw? Let's deal with the issues as they arise, rather than use them as an excuse not to try in the first place.
How would I approach the problem? "All of the above." Follow all plausible and ethical courses of action to see where they lead. It's too early to tell which method(s) will be effective, but if something is physically possible in this arena I expect we'll try it sooner or later.
Start making it acceptable for people to talk about death - how they'd like to die; what they want to happen to their organs or body after their death; what kind of funeral they want.
It's really important to let your family know how you feel about being hooked up to machines or how you'd feel about living with dementia or similar.
