X-Message-Number: 12302
From: "Enter your name here" <>
References: <>
Subject: Glad we all agree!
Date: Sat, 21 Aug 1999 22:20:36 -0700

It is good to see that everyone agrees that PESSIMISSM is uncalled for, as
all admit that none of us can prove which path may work first in the success
of cryonics.

(Now if we could all agree on the value of OPTIMISM that would be nice too).

Personally I think it is wonderful that the quantum computer (nano-computer)
breakthrough has happened.

Everything I have written in the last week has been a pointed attempt to
underline the OPTIMISM this should create since this means that it is almost
certain that through the application of this new developement by the
multi-billion dollar giants of the medical technology industry, we will come
to a place where cryonics will actually have the tools to succeed.

Now we don't have to merely hope that a handful of dedicated researchers
will unlock the secrets which will defeat death.

THAT would be enough to make anyone pessimistic!

And just one more thing.  Steve Bridge is right.  We had better not assume
that the coming technological breakthroughs will ever be applied by the
giants of medical technology to revive our members.  That will be OUR job.

But NO ONE can do it yet.  Those of you who are trying anyway, my best hopes
on your success.  But I don't care who gets there first.  I am just tickled
that at last we can see that we CAN get there!

The quantum computer (nano-computer) breakthrough only means that it is
virtually certain now that we CAN get there.

And that is a good reason to ditch any pessimism and choose a very realistic
optimism.  An optimism based on the realism of the most important scientific
breakthrough of this century and the cryonics-friendly coming applications
of that breakthrough.

The success of cryonics is ceasing to be a long shot.  It looks to be coming
to be inevitable.

Oh, by the way, Steve Bridge suggested 5 possible futures:
> 1.  Group A (21st C.M. group) finds the answer to placing patients
> into stasis and reviving them.
> 2.  Group B (the Big Boys) finds the answer to placing patients into
> stasis and reviving them.
> 3.  Both find the answer but only one finds it in time to help
> today's cryonics members.
> 4.  One finds the answer but only because of clues (and possibly
> financial success) generated by the other.
> 5.  Neither finds the answer.  No one gets revived.

But what about #6?

#6. Advances in other medical applications of the nano-computer
(nanotechnology) are finally adapted by US as the tools become available to
solve the specific problems of reviving those who have been suspended.

We ALREADY put patients into "stasis" when they are frozen.

PESSIMISM requires that we assume that we will FAIL to revive them.

OPTIMISM says we hope we will SUCCEED.

HONESTY requires that we admit that NONE OF US KNOW WHAT WILL WORK OR WHAT

But if I had to bet on the odds (and we do have to bet!), I'll bet that the
billion-dollar companies will make the necessary breakthroughs first.

It's just that before the quantum computer breakthrough it wasn't clear that
Big Money would get involved.  Now it seems inevitable.

I wish the best of luck to Saul Kent and everyone pressing forward on
current cryo research.  It is only because I am a realist that I have to
seriously doubt that relatively small money will beat out Big Money.

Thank God we DON'T have to depend just on ourselves anymore to see the
development of the technology we will need to make cryonics a success.  Huge
profits will drive Big Business to make it happen if it can be done at all.

And Thomas Donaldson was right also when he pointed out that we need to have
a society which will support our goal.  How fortunate we are that the Profit
Motive rules in current Western civilization so that the quantum computer
will lead to the nanotech revolution we need to achieve our goal.

Glad we all agree,

George Smith

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=12302