X-Message-Number: 25815 From: Date: Thu, 17 Mar 2005 11:28:24 EST Subject: Route 66 Content-Language: en This is prompted by a communication concerning my recent post on evidence for supplements. Most people including most scientists and mathematicians are poorly informed about the foundations and uses of probability theory. In particular, many seem to think one can use similar criteria to evaluate supplements and cryonics. This is not the case. As a crude analogy, consider the following questions: (1) Is there a way to get from geographical point A to B? (2) Can you get from A to B via Route 66? Both questions are easy to answer, in principle. Either Route 66 goes through both A and B or not, so that answers (2). The answer to (1) is Yes in principle, because there is always SOME way to get from one point to another on the surface of the earth. In practice, of course, if B is in the middle of a volcano you wouldn t even want to get there. Now let s look at supplements and cryonics. (3) Is supplement X reasonably efficacious for life extension? (4) Is cryonics likely to work for member or patient X? (3) in principle has a clear and sharp answer, yes or no, which could be revealed by adequate experiment. In practice, as usual, the cost usually prohibits finding that answer for a long time. (4) in principle also has a clear and sharp answer, which is Yes, because of the Precedent Principle. Whatever has existed (on a human scale), can exist again. You merely have to rearrange the atoms. In practice, once more, the difficulties allow room for argument as to particular procedures and time scales. But at one level we are talking about malleable or feedback-sensitive probabilities, which can be altered by our own actions. This doesn t change probability theory, but it materially changes the available strategies. Choosing to use a supplement does not alter the chance that it is effective. Choosing cryonics does improve the chance that it will work. Robert Ettinger Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" [ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=25815