X-Message-Number: 3572
Date: Sun, 1 Jan 1995 22:56:24 -0500
From: 
Subject: CRYONICS Coetzee's ideas

Yet again, even though I can't spare the time, I yield to the temptation to
stick my nose in.

Mr. Coetzee is right on a couple of points. It is indeed possible to use
visible light beyond the so-called resolution limit imposed by wave length.
See for example THE IMMORTALIST October, 1994, a reprint of a piece in
SCIENCE 3 September 1993. 

Indeed, as an undergraduate many years ago it was clear to me that this
"limit" was bogus. It simply did not seem possible for a "too small" object
to reflect or scatter light EXACTLY the SAME way for (say) different angles,
different intensities, and slightly different wavelengths. The image(s) might
be blurred and meaningless to the naked eye, but there had to be a way for
computers to disentangle and interpret the result. And so it has proved--in
addition to several other useful ideas now being developed.

As for extremely quick freezing and thawing, this can be done also, even with
large specimens--but only, as far as I know, using hyperbaric methods which
do not seem practical.

Of course, Mr. Coetzee's critics are right that a mere vague possibility,
even if it truly exists, isn't enough to justify diversion of resources
unless absolutely necessary. We are doing reasonably well; there is no need
to cast about wildly for new approaches.

Mr. Coetzee mentioned "lurkers" writing him, apparently suggesting that there
are subscribers on the net who don't want to participate publicly but have a
negative reaction to some of the things they read, and have confided these
reactions to him. If this is true, he could do us a  service by expanding on
this.

Robert Ettinger
Immortalist Society
Cryonics Institute

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=3572