X-Message-Number: 12168 From: "Michael Schepps" <> Subject: Re: CryoNet #12161 - #12163 Date: Wed, 21 Jul 1999 14:31:41 -0600 Unsuscribe -----Original Message----- From: CryoNet <> To: <> Date: Wednesday, July 21, 1999 3:10 AM Subject: CryoNet #12161 - #12163 >CryoNet - Wed 21 Jul 1999 > > #12161: to Jan Coetzee, re: memory losses [Thomas Donaldson] > #12162: Funeral Transporting Services Inc. NOT (just) a Mortician [Olaf Henny] > #12163: Re: Asteroids and Space Technology [Yvan Bozzonetti] > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Message #12161 >From: Thomas Donaldson <> >Subject: to Jan Coetzee, re: memory losses >Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 22:25:47 +1000 (EST) > >To Jan Coetzee:B > >Discovery that memory ability changes with age of the person does not come >close to proving the theory of Swanson. What he has to do is to show that >other possible explanations (such as a slow degeneration of the brains of >people as they grow older) simply fail to explain his observations. The fact >that this loss occurs at widely different ages also needs to be explained, >since after all the brains of almost all people are similar enough in size >that the notion that they simply differ in memory space becomes >questionable, at least. Suppose that the difference is as large as >he's shown; then (given nearly equal sized brains) some other brain >function must be lacking or deteriorated in those who DO remember well at >high ages. So he must do experiments to explore such possibilities. > >At some future time, yes, we may run out of memory space. Alternatively >we may simply forget more to make space for more recent experiences. Even >neural nets have a finite amount of memory, but (depending on the neural >net) they respond to added events not by simply seizing up and failing to >remember, but by forgetting earlier events in favor of the more recent >learning. Since our brains presently look likely to form several neural >nets, they may respond in just this way. Even so, the notion that this >"running out of memory space" comes into play after age 45 looks rather >weak. > >Most importantly, our memories do NOT work like computer memories, no >matter what else they may do. > > Best and long long life to all, > > Thomas Donaldson > >PS: You once subscribed to PERIASTRON, where I discuss such issues. >There is a great deal more to be said, but it deserves a private >message. Perhaps you might simply revive your subscription. And if >you want to submit and article, I will consider it (you know the >setup with articles to PERIASTRON). > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Message #12162 >Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 10:21:35 -0700 >From: Olaf Henny <> >Subject: Funeral Transporting Services Inc. NOT (just) a Mortician > >Robert Ettinger writes: > >"I'm surprised Mr. Henny apparently doesn't remember that Cryonics Institute >has worked with funeral directors in this way for a long time. We (and ACS) >are gradually building a network of known morticians, and have seldom had >difficulty finding one in almost any required area, sometimes even on an >emergency basis." > > >Of course I was aware of C.I.'s practice of involving >undertakers in the early stages of cryopreservation. That is >what my suggestions was based upon. I do not have enough >familiarity with the organizational structure of cryonic service >providers to come up with such an idea all by myself. > >However, Funeral Transporting Services Inc. appear to be far from >your local mortician, as a matter of fact, not being familiar >with the Funeral Acts of the various states and provinces, I am >not even sure if the mere transportation of corpses requires an >undertaker's licence or if Funeral Transporting Services Inc. >indeed have such a licence. > >Their name and purported scope of services offered nevertheless >suggests the following: > >- They have an infrastructure or at least an action plan in place > to transport corpses within and across national boundaries. >- Considering the low volume of cryonic suspensions, it is safe > to assume, that they have a much greater experience volume than > any cryonic provider. Otherwise they could not stay in > business. >- Because of their greater volume they are likely to have more > readily accessible contacts, which would be helpful in promptly >facilitating transportation, where obstacles might exist > (international or states boundaries). >- If they also have undertaker's licences, so much the better, > but as an organization with an international range they would > not have the "Johnnie-on-the-spot" advantage of local > morticians. It would rather be a toss-up if they could be on a > particular site any sooner than the rescue team of the cryonic > services provider. > >Best, >Olaf > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >Message #12163 >From: "Yvan Bozzonetti" <> >Subject: Re: Asteroids and Space Technology >Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999 20:10:09 +0200 > >This is a multi-part message in MIME format. > >------=_NextPart_000_0005_01BED2EB.DE34C3A0 >Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > >Re: Asteroids and Space Technology > >In message # 12146 Ran Simberg wrote: > >>On Fri, 16 Jul 1999 22:26:11 -0700, Olaf Henny wrote: >> >>>Thirty years ago, when I watched Neil Armstrong take that "small step" and >>>heard him promise that "giant leap" for mankind I expected, that this >>>"leap" would include 25 to 30 years later at least one moon base, if not >>>two competing ones, or some other equally significant presence in space. >>>Unfortunately I realize now, that we are not even halfway there yet. That >>>makes me highly skeptical about speculation on any rapid progress in space >>>technology. On the other hand computer technology has provided us with >>>technical advances, which I could not even have imagined thirty years ago. >> >>The rapid progress in space will come when private activity starts to >>dominate. It's only been a couple of years since the private funding >>passed the threshold of exceeding government funding, but the trend will >>continue and accelerate. >> >Well, much of that funding has flown in the communication satellite business. >It may be interesting on some ground, but as a space "progress" we are here >in the 1963 era, no more. Economy-driven space may hope to catch the >Apollo spirit in some centuries at best. > >>>When the Soviet competition in space faded, so did the American effort. >>>The problem appears to be the high market barrier in space commerce, i.e. >>>the enormous costs involved before a marketable commodity can be developed. >> >>That is indeed the problem, though some viable business cases are starting >>to be developed and see funding. See, for example http://www.spacedev.com. >> >I have argued elsewhere about space lesure as opposed to space tourism. >I think there is a market for watching building and testing space hardwares. >May be there will be such a center in France in some years... every space >enterprise: Rotary, Kelly,... could exploit that today and make millions before >the first orbital flight. > >The key is to present a long term, ambitious project with some dream beyond >commercial satellite launches. There we get back to cryonics: as these >projects would expand over tens of years or more, long life, ans so cryonics >would be an essential part of that thinking. > >By the way, my new internet address is: totara at free point fr. Totara is the >name of a long lived N-Z tree. > >Yvan Bozzonetti. > > >------=_NextPart_000_0005_01BED2EB.DE34C3A0 >Content-Type: text/html; > charset="iso-8859-1" > ><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> ><HTML><HEAD> ><META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type> ><META content="MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=GENERATOR> ><STYLE></STYLE> ></HEAD> ><BODY bgColor=#ffffff> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Re: Asteroids and Space Technology</FONT></DIV> ><DIV> </DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>In message # 12146 Ran Simberg wrote:</FONT></DIV> ><DIV> </DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>>On Fri, 16 Jul 1999 22:26:11 -0700, Olaf Henny >wrote:</FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>></FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>>>Thirty years ago, when I watched Neil >Armstrong take that "small step" and<BR>>>heard him promise that "giant >leap" for mankind I expected, that this<BR>>>"leap" would include 25 to 30 >years later at least one moon base, if not<BR>>>two competing ones, or >some other equally significant presence in space.<BR>>>Unfortunately I >realize now, that we are not even halfway there yet. That<BR>>>makes >me highly skeptical about speculation on any rapid progress in >space<BR>>>technology. On the other hand computer technology has >provided us with<BR>>>technical advances, which I could not even have >imagined thirty years ago.</FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>></FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>>The rapid progress in space will come when >private activity starts to<BR>>dominate. It's only been a couple of >years since the private funding<BR>>passed the threshold of exceeding >government funding, but the trend will<BR>>continue and >accelerate.</FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>></FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Well, much of that funding has flown in the >communication satellite business.</FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>It may be interesting on some ground, but as a >space "progress" we are here</FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>in the 1963 era, no more. Economy-driven >space may hope to catch the</FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Apollo spirit in some centuries at >best.</FONT></DIV> ><DIV> </DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>>>When the Soviet competition in space faded, >so did the American effort.<BR>>>The problem appears to be the high market >barrier in space commerce, i.e.<BR>>>the enormous costs involved before a >marketable commodity can be developed. </FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>></FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>>That is indeed the problem, though some viable >business cases are starting<BR>>to be developed and see funding. See, >for example <A >href="http://www.spacedev.com">http://www.spacedev.com</A>.<BR>></FONT>< /DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I have argued elsewhere about space lesure as >opposed to space tourism.</FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I think there is a market for watching building and >testing space hardwares.</FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>May be there will be such a center in France in >some years... every space</FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>enterprise: Rotary, Kelly,... could exploit that >today and make millions before</FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>the first orbital flight.</FONT></DIV> ><DIV> </DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>The key is to present a long term, ambitious >project with some dream beyond</FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>commercial satellite launches. There we get back to >cryonics: as these</FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>projects would expand over tens of years or more, >long life, ans so cryonics</FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>would be an essential part of that >thinking.</FONT></DIV> ><DIV> </DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>By the way, my new internet address is: totara >at free point fr. Totara is the</FONT></DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>name of a long lived N-Z tree.</FONT></DIV> ><DIV> </DIV> ><DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Yvan Bozzonetti.</FONT></DIV> ><DIV> </DIV></BODY></HTML> > >------=_NextPart_000_0005_01BED2EB.DE34C3A0-- > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- > >End of CryoNet Digest >********************* > Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=12168