X-Message-Number: 3102
From:  (Thomas Donaldson)
Subject: CRYONICS: re cryonics #3077-3084
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 1994 19:28:05 -0700 (PDT)


Hi again!

At least in an abstract philosophical sense Bob is quite right about random-
ness. It IS very hard to define. If we refer to any physical phenomenon as
random, we are making an assumption of randomness somewhere down the line. If
we refer to abstract mathematical instances of randomness, then everyone
knows that they come not from something REALLY random but from a deterministic
process in our computer. (Sure, it's not easy to predict, but it IS determin-
istic.

Not only that, but this fundamental issue lies behind all the references to
entropy, thermodynamics, and other such sides of physics --- not to mention
quantum mechanics. And someday, if only because there IS a question here,
we will struggle through to a better formulation.

HOWEVER I must also say that if THAT were all we had to go on if we discuss
ultimate revivability, we are grasping at a very thin reed. Even if we find out

that the universe is completely deterministic, the computing resources 
availableto work out or work backwards to rescue someone might easily be larger 
than the

universe itself. OK, then we try it in a superuniverse: but no matter what, the 
interest in reviving Thomas Donaldson or Bob Ettinger after gigayears is very
likely to fade. For that matter, why bother to be suspended in the first place
if someday gigayears in the future your molecules will be traced back to their
original forms as you? It is important that cryonics is NOT about such 
ultimate philosophies. On a cosmic scale, we want to be revived SOON. And that
means that we should address all the issues involved in improving our current
methods.

I have been saying, myself, that methods of freezing BRAINS are far more 
important than any amount of messing around at 0 degrees C. Sure, for a long 
time Alcor's dog experiments were NOT just experiments, they were training 

sessions in which Alcor people could practice what they would do in a 
suspensionover and over and over. And that is very important. One of the 
distinctions 
Alcor attained (and still has, though one of the main movers in creating this
distinction has now founded Biopreservation) is the amount of care Alcor 
people take to see that someone is suspended as well as they are able. That
care shows itself mostly in the stages before actual freezing, but still, I
can't believe that trying to keep the brain in good condition BEFORE freezing
means nothing to its state afterwards. (At a minimum, if the vascular system
remains clear, its possible to perfuse the brain with whatever solution we
devise. If it does not, some parts will be badly damaged ... or perhaps the
whole rain will become badly damaged). Yet up to now we still know very 
little about our results, and even a clear vascular system may mean very
little in terms of the damage our methods now cause. 

However, for whatever reasons, it seems that it is only now that cryonicists
have started to look at the REAL problem, of what happens during the freezing
process. Perhaps others have not heard me say this, but it is longstanding:
even if the suspension technicians have greasy hands and do their operation in
a dusty garage, if they can freeze brains well enough to show that all the
information needed for revival remains in them, they will become the leading
cryonicists. Their methods will be the ones we must imitate.

I also hope that everyone involved in these conversations knows what the 
consequence of LOOKING at the end result of our suspensions will be. We will
find many more problems than we imagined to exist. Cracking may well be only
the first one. We may find out, in a provable way, that some (or even worse,
all) patients frozen up to now were so badly damaged that their revival, if
possible, may take many hundreds of years. But we must persist, because 
the only way to improve our current methods is to find out, in detail, just
what they do --- including the damage they cause. If cryonics is to be REAL
and not simply degenerate over time into yet one more ideology about what
happens after death, this kind of detailed examination is vital.

			Long long life,

				Thomas Donaldson

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=3102