X-Message-Number: 18947
From: "mike99" <>
Subject: RE: CryoNet #18939 - #18942 on the probabilities of cryonic success
Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2002 15:58:28 -0600

I have to agree with Thomas Donaldson that we cannot, at this time,
calculate the odds that cryonics will work at all, or that in any individual
case it will succeed.

I do believe that we can make one gross generalization, however: The odds
for radical life extension -- whatever they may prove to be in the long
run -- are very likely improved with cryonics. Cryonics will either prove to
be a net benefit or a neutral factor; it can't hurt (except financially, and
even there probably not by much for most people living in the industrialized
world).

In my particular case, given my present age and the best estimates I have
seen for development of other life extension technologies, I believe that
cryonics is a far better bet than, say, waiting for mind uploading to be
developed. I base this on 1) my life expectancy (according to standard
actuarial tables as of the year 1999) and 2) on the Kurzweil-More estimated
time of Singularity as being circa 2040-2060 A.D., and 3) assuming that the
Singularity will necessarily precede the development of mind uploading.

Of course, your mileage may vary.

Regards,
Michael LaTorra




Member:
Extropy Institute: www.extropy.org
World Transhumanist Association: www.transhumanism.org
Alcor Life Extension Foundation: www.alcor.org
Society for Technical Communication: www.stc.org

-----Original Message-----
From: CryoNet [mailto:]
Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2002 3:00 AM
To: 
Message #18942
Date: Sat, 20 Apr 2002 07:59:37 -0400
From: Thomas Donaldson <>
Subject: CryoNet #18939 - #18941

Hi everyone!

A short comment on the so-called "probability of revival". If we are
going to compute probabilities, we need to know the total number
of possible events (the denominator) and the number of possible
events which will happen (the numerator). Probability is of course
a fraction <= 1.

I note that we do not now have a value either for the denominator or
the numerator of this fraction. Note that the denominator can't just
be 2 (ie, either you survive or you don't) because the number of
possible ways we can either survive or not survive is much larger
than 2 ... and I would be surprised if anyone can present me with
a list. As for the numerator, that too remains unknown ... not that
the calculation has already become meaningless when the denominator
isn't known.

I know that many people want to take about probabilities of revival.
Such suppositions remain totally meaningless, when looked at coolly
with the math required in mind.

Not only are they meaningless, but it's impossible to give these
numbers for the simple reason that any ways in which we improve
suspensions will also alter the numerator and the denominator. Even
if we could find them in the first place, they would probably
change the following week, especially if we ourselves are doing
our best to change them. It's like asking for the probability of
victory in a battle in which you are just then taking part:
you're busily trying to do your best to change that probability.
A probability calculation becomes meaningless to all but historians
who want to discuss it afterwards: in cryonics terms, when you've
either survived or failed to survive. (And for cryonics it's even
worse, because your victory may just not have come yet, even
if that of many other cryonicists has... victory here being your
revival).

If you want to be revived, then do what you can to see that become
more likely. Its probability doesn't mean a thing.

		Best wishes and long long life to all,

			Thomas Donaldson

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=18947