X-Message-Number: 5935 Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1996 08:58:07 -0800 From: John K Clark <> Subject: SCI.CRYONICS RE: Virtue of Suffering -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- In #5932 On Thu, 14 Mar 1996 (Dwight Jones) Wrote: >>Steven Harris wrote: >> DNA is a recipe, not a blueprint. >To say that DNA is not a blueprint- that's not quite obvious. >One must ask where the blueprint is then- in God's filing >cabinet? For Cryonics patients to be revived you will need Nanotechnology and if you have that technology then the distinction between a blueprint and a recipe gets very blurry. I don't think the experience we have in constructing large complicated things with bulk technology is applicable to Nanotechnology. If I was given a the complete blueprints of the World Trade Center I could not construct a duplicate, not even if I had access to all the machinery and raw materials in the world. I know nothing about construction techniques, thus the blueprints do not contain enough information for ME to implement them. It would be enough for a master architect, but he'd have to be very good. A blueprint assumes that you have the construction skills needed, it tells you a part should go in a particular spot but it doesn't tell you HOW to put it there. A skyscraper is made out of thousands of different parts that interact in trillions of different ways. Most of the interactions would be disastrous if not handled in exactly the right way, it takes great skill and intelligence to master them all. The parts are made of subparts and are themselves extremely complex, even the architect has little knowledge of how to construct subparts from raw materials. No one man, no thousand men, has the knowledge to go from ore in the ground to a fully functioning building. Things would be very different if I was working with Lego blocks. There are only a few different kinds of blocks and they can snap together in only a few different ways, none of them disastrous because the blocks are tough and cheap. Once I mastered the ability to pick up an individual block, move it anyplace I want, and snap it to another block, I could build any conceivable structure that can be made with Lego blocks, all I'd need is the blueprints (and the patience). Even if I didn't have the blueprints it would be easy to look at a Lego object and note how the blocks fit together, then I could make my own blueprint (or recipe) and build a duplicate object. Nature only uses 92 different types of blocks (the atoms of the elements), less than 20 are important in making most objects that interest us. As for life, 98.5% of it is made of only 4 different types of atoms. By definition nanotechnology means the ability to pick up an individual atom, move it anyplace you want, and bond it to another individual atom. Once you have that ability the distinction between a recipe and a blueprint starts to get a bit fuzzy. You wouldn't really need either one, just access to the object you want to duplicate. It wouldn't matter to a assembler how large the finished product was, it's all the same to it, pick up that atom and move it over there. All it would need is raw materials, energy, and information. Raw materials and energy are the same regardless of what you're making, as for information, if you have nanotechnology besides having the ability of moving atoms around you also can detect the position of atoms in an existing object. As long as you had access to the object, all you'd need is a good look at it and you could duplicate it, you don't need to know how it works. It is possible that some of the intermediate states of the object you are constructing would not be stable. I can see two ways to get around this problem without a lot of intelligence or skills. 1) Always use a jig, even if you don't need it. 2) Make a test. If you know you put an atom at a certain place and now it's mysteriously gone, put another one there again and this time use scaffolding. It's also theoretical possible that some exotic structures could not be built, something that had to be complete before it is stable, like an arch, but unlike an arch had no room to put temporary scaffolding around it to keep things in place during construction. It's unlikely this is a serious limitation, nature can't build things like that either. With bulk technology moving things is easy but building objects from a description, like a blueprint, takes great skill because the parts are so complicated. With nanotechnology moving things is hard but once you've gained that ability, building from a description is easy. John K Clark -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: 2.6.i iQCzAgUBMUmbg303wfSpid95AQHbVATtFBt/+I0xw6fVk4sTDHF6f3TqKuEfXmix ggHamWA+e1f1shYrFOCMSkVhPZrN6LzsyJ4Nh4Kvp63En26pZx3Rsei9mhdh9sTV GHd+5V1sFQuvjKJ68Ed4ZGcLRbkeDXEBmWjZlnt8OYyGXOzrxkFGRmMHeve3+DBR 91WwlFdA+WdOOpU4qKC6wMzFiPhUlaHCQPCDO5YWTqxuK8RJ2bY= =zwkc -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=5935