X-Message-Number: 13332
From: "Paul Michael" <>
References: <>
Subject: Nano Power +
Date: Tue, 29 Feb 2000 17:04:41 -0800

/
>
> Message #13324
> Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 11:03:27 -0500 (EST)
> From: Charles Platt <>
> Subject: nanopower
>
> > From: "Paul Michael" <>
> > It may not be a requirement that nano machines will require high
> > levels of "on board" computing power. They may simply need to be
able
> > to communicate with such an entity.
>
> Sigh. As I pointed out in a previous message, Drexler himself has
> acknowledged in his books that the bandwidth for communication
between the
> assemblers and any external computing engine is likely to be
limited.
> This limits the ability of the outside computer to see what the
assemblers
> see, and tell them precisely what to do. For similar reasons, the
Mars
> rover was autonomous in many respects.
>
Even deeper sigh.  Yes the Mars Rover is a good example, however NASA
might be persuaded to admit that we are not at the Zenith of
scientific space technology yet, and that future missions make take a
different approach. Especially considering the result of the
last Mars landing.

As nano technology has not even launched its equivalent of a Sputnik
yet I shall continue to speculate as I wish, without searching all
your previous posts.


. Research is only
> one of many methods to achieve this goal. A well-qualified standby
team is
> another option. Good monitoring equipment for terminal patients is
> another. Liquid ventilation to achieve rapid initial cooling is
another. A
> properly controlled cryoprotective perfusion is another. And so on.
>
> During the past two decades, we have seen progress in all these
> areas--none of it coming from CI.
>

A comment on this statement:  CI, to the best of my knowledge after a
fairly close involvement with them over the last eight years or so, is
not now and never has been, promoting itself as a research
organisation.

It exists to prepare and store its Patients, it does this at a
competitive price, it spends it funds on exactly this.

Most importantly of all, underlined by some unfortunate recent events,
IT IS STILL IN BUSINESS.

The Immortalist Society, an independent but associated organisation,
has raised some small sums for research and made public the results of
that, a subject much debated in this forum.
No doubt as we raise more funds The Immortalist group will do more
research.

CI is wise to concentrate its efforts where they belong, looking after
those entrusted to our care.

Anything less would invite genuine criticism


Paul Michaels

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=13332