X-Message-Number: 6782
Date: 21 Aug 96 12:05:22 EDT
From: yvan Bozzonetti <>
Subject: Re: Regrets

Melodie T Writes in msg # 6772:

>For anyone thinking about cryonics and still having doubts, I'd like to share
>a few personal thoughts. I debated for years about making a committment and
>as some of you know, my husband and I became terminally ill and financially
>insolvent. Wednesday, August 14th, my beloved husband, Jeff, died at home >as
was his wish. I cannot tell you how much I regret not having made the
>committment to cryonics when we had financial options. Now instead of >knowing
that my husband is temporarily resting in his cryonic tube, I have only >a cold
grave to visit.


Hard to pick up from here.... To be cold, I think not everyone must see a second

life, the only dividing line between the "have" and "have not" must be the will:
When you are living, you want or you want not extend your life. There we have a
person condemned for lack of money or lack of faith in cryonics when there was

money, certainly not a case dictated by free will. I find the option: "the money
or your live" particularly bad to say the least.

Well, cryonics organizations are constrained by market laws but I think
everything must be done to escape it. Why not market straight freezing and

freeze drying?  Well, we know any repair from such a state has nearly no hope of
succes, the only way out would be uploading, something beyond the Frankeinstein
limit of most reders of that list.

	If the freeze drying-uploading option could be marketed at the price of
an ordinary funeral service, there would be no more money selection effect.
Someone subscribing to that service could in a second time inverst much more to
get full cryonics service, it is simpler to walk step by stet that jump from
nothing to full cryonics service. With the Project Prometheus we can even ask:
in some years, what is "full cryonics service" today may falls to the level of
freeze drying quality service in the mind of most people. Who would choose

anything else than reversible vitrification ( Sorry to reduce PP at this option,
I get today the GF paper sent by T. Donaldson and it looks far more convincing
that any South African clams).

This last section will be universally rejected at time of first distribution,
may be it will look better as vine after some years; my problem here is about
recovering someone from ordinary grave or ashes. The idea is to copy the brain
structure for uploading before it decays. The scaner would work at another
epoch, sometime in the comming centuries. The only requirement to have someday
that kind of machine is : Time travel is NOT possible in our Universe. The idea
unfolds that way: We know we are in an orientable space so any tangent bundle

space build on it will be non-orientable (there will be some time loops).All our
chemical structures rest on the electromagnetics force field, That one extends
in the usual four dimensional space time *and* one dimensional loop in non
orientable space defined by the symetry group U(1). Any force field will use
U(1) as its natural unit and so interact with it in the non orientable space.
Such a field could be used to scan an electromagnetics structure without space
or time limitations. Mathematicians call non orientable fiber space fiber
bundles because if ther is only one fiber of one kind at each point in

space-time, all of them pack in a bundle without distance or duration separation
as seen from their own space.


Before jumping to Frankeinstein rejection, I suggest to honest readers to take a
look at a book such: An Elementary PRIMER For GAUGE THEORY, by K Moriyasu, ed.
by World Scientific Publishing Co. (1983). (Its main advantage is to be small
and cheap).

	Y. Bozzonetti.


Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=6782