X-Message-Number: 24094 From: Date: Wed, 12 May 2004 03:02:07 EDT Subject: Re: CryoNet #24083: Thoughts on Probability From Steve Bridge In reply to Mike P. (Not "Mike Perry") >Message #24083 >From: >Date: Mon, 10 May 2004 00:13:13 EDT >Subject: Thoughts on Probability < >The data I have seen posted on the cryonet and also on the web is fairly >depressing with regard to the potential of reanimation one day. Considering all >the components going into the formula it would appear that the chances of there >being a real possibility of it coming to fruition seems to border on the side >of chaos taking us all down. > >Are there any recent data or analyses that discuss the chances in a more >positive light. The one in ten thousand stat I ran across, although I have seen >some a little more cheerfully oriented, was a little chilling. > >I am waiting, hopefully, to be convinced that I am wrong! > Mike wrote to me about this question separately, and I answered him. For the sake of others reading this set of arguments, I will quote from my response to him, eliminating personal discussion. Mike was at least partly referring to two predictions by Steve Harris and Mike Perry, summarized by him below: Pardon that this table won't line up easily, but I think it can be read. The first number is Harris's low estimate of probability, the second number is his high estimate. The 3rd and 4th numbers are the same for Mike Perry, low then high. >The probabilities that are discussed are quite depressing as follows: Condition Probabilities > Harris Perry > Lo Hi Lo Hi >a. Materialism is correct 0.95 0.99 1 1 >b. Identity encoded in structure 0.95 0.99 1 1 >c. Favorable conditions for suspension 0.75 0.95 0.75 0.95 >d. Suspension preserves enough information 0.50 0.90 0.50 0.95 >e. Mishap-free storage 0.95 0.99 0.90 0.99 >f. Cryonics organization survives 0.20 0.60 n n >g. Sufficient social stability 0.70 0.90 n n >h. Cryonics is continuously legal 0.70 0.90 n n >i. Nanotechnology is physically possible 0.90 0.98 1 1 >j. Nanotechnology is perfected 0.95 0.99 n n >k. Nanotechnology is non-catastrophic 0.20 0.50 n n >l. Cryonic revival is "cheap enough" 0.85 0.95 n n >m. Cryonic revival is permitted 0.50 0.80 n n >n. The social problem is non-catastrophic 0.008 0.18 0.39 0.86 >o. Technologically, will it work? 0.29 0.81 0.34 0.89 >p. Overall, will it work? 0.002 0.15 0.13 0.77 I replied to Mike: As far as the "data" you quote goes: 1. It is not *data.* It is the guessing of two very bright men, who can predict the future just as accurately and inaccurately as anyone else. It has nothing to do with evidence, and tells us more about the people doing the guessing than it does about the real future. 2. Several of those categories will be influenced by you and the other people who join or do not join cryonics. c, e, f, g, h, j, k, l, m, and n are not fixed by nature. They are determined by how much money, attention, and work is provided to Alcor and other cryonics organizations. If you join, the odds go up just a bit. If you do not join, the odds stay the same or maybe even go down a bit. Who knows what good you might accomplish in the future? It may be your $1,000 donation to research someday that allows that one more instrument to be purchased that leads to the discovery that makes revival possible. You might introduce a son to cryonics, who influences a scientist friend to get interested, who gets his company to work on a problem that leads to less suspension damage. Predictions of the future always start out (or SHOULD) with -- "if things go on as they are today...." But they never do. We cannot predict what will happen; but we know that what does happen will be the result of decisions made by real people today. There is nothing here to be depressed about. There is only work to be done. The best way to predict the future is to create it. Buried and cremated, your odds are Zero. If you really want to stay alive, it is time to make decisions that lead to your odds improving. YOU are part of the solution. Finally, Mike, there is one more quote (I forget from whom) that has kept me going for 15 years. I had this on my desk when I was president of Alcor. You cannot become who you want to be by remaining who you are. Best wishes, Steve Bridge Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII" [ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=24094