X-Message-Number: 5137 From: Date: Wed, 8 Nov 1995 12:56:18 -0500 Subject: misc. Thanks to Mike Darwin for the information about his hyperbaric system and offer to share research. Thanks also for the renewed invitation to visit; I'll keep it in mind. As to the possible hyperbaric work, my current opinion is that it is well down on the priority list, and in fact shelved for the foreseeable future. As to research cooperation in general, however, I am hopeful as to its feasibility. My time projections usually turn out over-optimistic (sometimes by thirty years or more), but I do hope this winter to talk with Alcor people, BioTime people, 21st Century, and others, as well as the Ukrainians, to work, first, toward some consensus on priorities and, second, to get an actual agreement to allocate work and expenses, at least in some areas. This may sound VERY overoptimistic, for many reasons, but it may be worth a try. Thanks to Steve Harris for the hyperbaric discussion. For a physician, he has a remarkable breadth and depth of education. I'm still not clear on the time required for freezing when high pressure is suddenly released. Steve says "flash" freezing is only possible with thin layers of tissue, which of course is true in the absence of hyperbaric methods; but I should think that high pressure could be released in a matter of seconds if it is gaseous pressure, and if you had enough very large valves (awkward and expensive, yes, and perhaps even requiring new art); or perhaps a fraction of a second if it is hydraulic, transmitted through liquid. If you could after all get "flash" freezing in this way, then there still might be some possibility of minimal movement or mixing of material in the tissues, suggesting better conservation of information. (Again: not minimal damage, but minimal loss of information) However, as noted above, I am ready to put high pressure on the shelf for a while. Some day someone will do a study on the utility of Cryonet to its various users and from various points of view. Certainly one gets the impression that much of it does not repay the writers in any very clear, direct, or substantial way. Utility to readers is another story. In any case, thanks again to Dr. Brown for maintaining it, and to the people who graciously respond at length to serious questions, even old or naive ones. Robert Ettinger Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=5137