X-Message-Number: 16140
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 21:32:24 -0400
From: Thomas Donaldson <>
Subject: comments on duplicates, nanotech

Hi everyone!

Some comments about messages for #16128-16130:

First, though I've already said that duplicating a person is likely to be
far harder than those on Cryonet seem to believe, I will add that the 
recent note by Swayze doesn't come near the issue, even if duplication
can be done. The problem is not whether or not YOU believe that someone
is your duplicate, but whether someone is your duplicate independently of
your beliefs. This matter becomes even more complex because duplicates will
very quickly CEASE to be duplicates when both are aware and conscious. 
Even having sex with your duplicate will cause that duplicate to cease to
be a duplicate: a close twin, yes, but hardly a duplicate.

As for reviving someone without using nanotechnology, a lot depends
here on the definition of nanotechnology. Even biochemistry uses molecules
and modifies them, so in a sense we already have nanotechnology ... we
just want a more powerful variety. Moreover, we should not restrict
our ideas to those of nanotechnology in any case: so long as we can truly
suspend and revive someone, then the technology used to do so should
not matter to ANY cryonicist. 

Moreover, if anyone wants information about the work of INF or 21st 
Century Medicine, they can try to get it from  Greg has
worked as a major player with both organizations. It seems to me that
this work deserves major support from ALL cryonicists, whether or not
they believe that nanotechnology will help. 

And of course, about aging, I will say the same thing ... though (believe
it or not) the case that some kind of nanotechnology will help us 
defeat aging completely (not just slow it down) seems to me to be 
stronger than that for cryonics.

		Best wishes and long long life for all,

			Thomas Donaldson

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=16140