X-Message-Number: 6647
From:  (Thomas Donaldson)
Subject: Re: CryoNet #6635 - #6641
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 1996 14:04:11 -0700 (PDT)

Hi again!

Once more on Prometheus and nanotechnology.

As someone who thinks of biotechnology as a branch of nanotechnology, it's
very clear that finding ways to vitrify brain IS AN INSTANCE of nanotechnology.
But if you really want to separate them, my last posting pointed out that
the ability to store brains with minimal damage doesn't mean that we can
have a successful suspension. It's just a big step towards a successful 
suspension. And if you or anyone doesn't want to contribute to that step,
then all that later nanotechnology may well never be relevant to you: it is
still an ASSUMPTION, rather than an experimentally proven fact, that our
current methods preserve enough information to revive YOU (a person, yes, but
will it be you?).

Of course, maybe you believe estimates that nanotechnology will become able
to do everything needed in 10 years or 15 years --- or some other near term
period. If anything, what I've read makes me think that such an estimate is
far shakier than the estimate that vitrification can be developed in 10
years. And even if it is not, and you firmly believe in its likely short-term
success, then all you have to do is set up your own version of Prometheus
and make pledges to THAT. You may even prove your point, and as one among
many cryonicists, I really don't care HOW I am revived so long as I am 
revived.

Perhaps I am too harsh here, but I detect in those who don't want to 
pledge "because they think Nanotechnology will be needed for revival" are 
simply making excuses and shoving their problems off onto theology and
metaphysics. Yes, I understand perfectly how some readers can find that 
they simply won't have the necessary funds to promise $1000/yr for 10
years. I actually looked at my own accounts to assure myself that I would,
since I am now on a fixed income. For anyone who cannot afford , or 
perhaps could only afford it by ceasing their preparations and membership
in a cryonics society (a self-defeating act!), they have a very good
excuse --- and I hope that in the end they can benefit from the technology 
which Prometheus MAY provide. It's true but unfortunate that we all have
calls on our resources OTHER than cryonics. But I cannot see how a belief
in Nanotechnology will suffice.

As for nanotechnology itself, we'll probably find many different ways to
manipulate matter at nanoscales. Biotechnologists are presently making
significant advances in learning to predict structure of biological 
molecules --- from which will follow the ability to manipulate that
structure, despite its apparent complexity. (I really would suggest that
readers of this message get a good book on biochemistry and read it, not
as its authors intend, but as an illustration of the kinds of things
we can do with the right molecular design). Materials scientists have
been working on molecular design for some time, and now they've started
to work out how to make structures... and of course, we see all the 
theoretical work that Drexler and others have done. And as I pointed out
in my last message on this subject, even now the various microscopes able
to view (and with mods, manipulate) single atoms have proliferated all
through present-day science. There are many roads to what we want to do:
some short, some long and twisted.  

And I hope very much that those who have problems with vitrification 
will at a minimum work out their own route and make pledges of similar 
amounts to follow it. If they do not, they do no more than talk --- 
the most evanescent means to express ourselves.

			Best and long long life,

				Thomas Donaldson


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=6647