X-Message-Number: 26974 Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2005 10:30:16 -0400 From: Thomas Donaldson <> Subject: Comments for Leitl and Yvan B TO Various: For E Leitl: It looks as if you agree with me about embalming. I would say that if anyone really wants to keep someone revivable by that method, using nanotechnology or any other means, thare are lots of questions which must be answered first. I'll add that someday (although low enough temperatures are automatic far enough from the Sun) I would not be surprised if such work is actually done, and those needing long term preservation will go through a special (nanotech?) treatment which fixes them. But that's not presently reachable. For Yvan Bozzonetti: Going backwards, your discussion of synapses and dendrites looks way out of date to me. I've said before that our circuitry changes as part of learning (and probably for other reasons too). Second, (or first), what you are claiming is that if a processor works fast enough, then it can substitute for many slower processors. Whether that is possible depends on a lot of factors, and it's not just how fast this single processor may be. Our body works by doing lots of things literally simultaneously. Simple walking, if you think about it, gives a good example; and remember that while you're walking you're doing lots of other things too. If the output of each processor is needed by the other, then you won't be able to combine their activities into just one processor: it will do the job of one processor and halt because it does not have the results of the other, which it needs to go further. This is a problem which does not depend on speed. I may simply not answer you the next time you raise this argument, basically because I don't wish to repeat myself, and I believe my point here is simple and easy to understand. And as I said before, if you wish to try to devise a neuron using outmoded ideas of how neurons work, then go ahead, I can't prevent you. Best wishes and long long life for all, Thomas Donaldson Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=26974