X-Message-Number: 13344
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2000 07:29:56 -0500
From: Thomas Donaldson <>
Subject: CryoNet #13328 - #13337

Hi everyone!

I still can't do much, but I can get Cryonet and give some answers.
And so here are a few comments:

JJ Hughes, in his message, describes a primitive version of what
Saul Kent and the LIFE EXTENSION people have been extensively funding.
Kent and Faloon have even produced a set of tapes, which may interest
Hughes a lot. One of the main scientists advocating vitrification
rather than freezing, and who has done a good deal of work already
in that line, is working with Saul and Bill Faloon to develop and
promote that technology. He's also a cryonicist and he helps with
projects looking at brain vitrification.

The computing issue in using nanotechnology to repair our brain
(or anything else) is quite meaningless. Given that our brain has
many nerve connections, some quite large and hardly nano-, NO
repair can really work without first getting the state of the 
entire brain. Yes, that state can be gotten by many different
nanodevices (among other ways), which spread through the brain and
report on the results in one small region. Then they leave the
brain and their results are read off into a computer, separately.
This computer (within wide limits, its size doesn't matter) would
then work out the best guess for how everything was formerly
connected together. After that a separate set of devices goes
through the brain reconnecting everything according to the plan
found.

Of course, if the freezing/vitrification itself causes little
damage, no special technology would be needed for repair. Those who
denigrate such work, or even fail to realize just what it means for
us, are hardly helping their own survival. Would you rather be
suspended by a technology which is KNOWN to work, or by another
technology which just might work but requires lots more technology
to repair the damage it has caused?

Incidentally, just as Ettinger has suggested, any computer which
tries working out your brain connections from the result of a poor
freezing can use virtually any available information to do so.
That information need not bear on anyone elses brain, either. The
problem resembles detective work much more than it resembles science.

Finally, there is a problem with using technology which applies to
our gut as a means to repair brains. Brains have a system called
the "blood brain barrier" and their own special repair methods.
No, I'm not saying that it is impossible, only that it is unlikely.

Finally, I note that many recent Cryonet postings deal with science
or technology which may apply to us. That's good, and once in a 
while someone comes up with something I haven't heard of. That's
even better. I will point out, though, that I have been publishing
a science newsletter aimed specifically at questions important for
cryonics, and that's why many of these postings look awfully
familiar to me. And if you want to learn more about scientific
developments relevant to cryonics, you're welcome to subscribe.
Just send me a message () and I'll
tell you how to get a few sample issues or even subscribe for a 
year.
			Best and long long life to all,

				Thomas Donaldson

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=13344