X-Message-Number: 32669
References: <>
From: Gerald Monroe <>
Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 06:25:23 -0500
Subject: Re: CryoNet #32665 - #32668

--0016367f926c119a6b0489d908e6

>
>
>

Also, current scanners are macroscopic and scan from outside the body.
>  Is there anyone who doubts that future scanners will exploit micro-
> or nanoscopic agents which will non-traumatically scan the body from
> within? The circulatory system -- capillary bed -- provides
> comprehensive, fine-grained access to the most remote areas of the
> body, and that includes the brain.  And if we're dealing with a cryo
> patient, then use bots to clear the bulk perfusate from the
> circulatory system and replace it with say LN2 as a heat sink and
> navigable liquid medium for the bots.
>
> You all get my point, so when addressing the need for a brain scan,
> just leave out the "destructive"" part, will ya?  Please.
>
> Such high end techniques *might *be possible with the limitations set by
physics and available matter.  Cryonics has to limit itself to things that
we are almost certain are possible.  Nanomachines already exist - they are
the proteins in your body.  Every component of your entire body was
assembled from individual atoms through a series of converging processes.
 (your body cannot make every molecular part, bacteria have to do the low
end stuff, but everything was made using molecular manufacturing).

Since we know molecular manufacturing is real, Eric Drexler and others have
proposed ways to actually do it using advanced versions of conventional
technologies.  That's why Dr. Drexler's proposed designs look like
miniaturized versions of STM probes, since we already have these.    We know
a self replicating molecular manufacturing device can exist, because it
already exists in nature, and that human beings will eventually build one if
technology continues to advance.

So cryonics preserves the body in a way that we already can preserve small
living tissues with and revive them, and we propose to resurrect the
patients using improved versions of technology that already exists today or
exists in nature.  This is why cryonics is close to being a science and not
just wishful thinking.

And the 'destructive' nature of the scan really isn't the problem.  However
you get the blueprints, every cell in the brain of a cryonics patient will
probably need to be torn down and rebuilt. (and the body rebuilt from
scratch)  This creates philosophical dilemmas regardless, as it means that a
cryonics patient is 'dead' at the cellular level and every cell has to be
changed in order to revive them.  I suppose for superstitious reasons you
could use the same atoms in the same cells when you are rebuilding the brain
rather than new atoms from the molecular feedstock, but theoretically
there's no difference.

--0016367f926c119a6b0489d908e6

 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1

[ AUTOMATICALLY SKIPPING HTML ENCODING! ] 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32669