[ExI] Cryonics Alexandre Erler and bad philosophy

Wed Nov 29 16:35:18 UTC 2017

Hi Max

Thanks for taking my
concerns
 seriously, I'm glad to see you think they may not be entirely without
merit. You mentioned fracturing but I'm not very worried about that because
I think a good computer could figure out what parts should go where
.
I'm much more worried about turbulence, that is
parts
 mixing in a nonlinear way, because then even a nano-computer may not be
able to put Humpty Dumpty
 back together again, or even figure out what his brain looked like before
all the damage.

If ALCOR's preservation methods improves enough that a person, or even a
mouse, can be brought back to full viability from liquid nitrogen
temperatures without Drexler's Nanotechnology then I'll forget all about
ASC; I don't think that's going to happen but I'd love to be proven wrong.
In the meantime I think the focus should be on preserving the most
information we can with as little distortion as possible.

 John K Clark
=================

On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 10:32 PM, Max More <max at maxmore.com> wrote:

> Hi John,
>
> No need to apologize for being a pain in the ass. These are important
> questions.
>
> I'm not sure I have the time nor deep knowledge to answer all your points
> adequately but will try to do so soon and have forwarded your thoughts to
> others with more in-depth knowledge. For now, just a couple of quick
> responses.
>
> Well yes, but nobody is going to be revived from liquid nitrogen
>> temperatures using either ALCOR's method or the ASC technology until full
>> scale Drexler style nanotechnology is developed.
>
>
> 1. Some very smart and well-informed people in the field would not agree
> with this statement -- at least in cases where fracturing can be
> eliminated.
>
> 2. Alcor has no in-principle objection to offering ASC. ASC still requires
> the full capabilities of standby, stabilization, and transport (a major
> part of the total cost) and Alcor already has that figured out. There is
> nothing in Alcor's model that biases us against ASC. I believe the main
> issue is that ASC introduces a further (and major) level of difficulty in
> reversibility. Our goal at Alcor is to minimize reliance on projected
> breakthroughs in future technology. On a related matter, it's clear to me
> that there is a major divide here between those who find it essential to be
> revived in their biological bodies and those who believe they will survive
> just as well in software emulations. I'm in the latter camp but, in my
> position, must take fully into account a great many people in the first
> camp.
>
> Best,
>
> --Max
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 6:51 PM, John Clark <johnkclark at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Max More <max at maxmore.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Max
>>
>> Sorry for being a pain, you don't have a easy job and you know one hell
>> of a lot more about Cryonics than I do but some things don't add up, or at
>> least I can't get them to.
>>  I just wish somebody could explain to me exactly what the downside of
>> ASC is because the philosophical objections given by Erler in the current
>> issue of Cryonics strikes me as being utterly ridiculous   
>>
>>
>> > 
>>> The fact that ASC allows you to show clearly ultrastructural
>>> preservation better doesn't mean that ASC is doing a better job at
>>> ultrastructure preservation.
>>>
>>
>> It doesn't?  At the very least it clearly shows that its easier to obtain
>> the ultrastructural information with a ASC sample than a ALCOR sample.
>>
>> > 
>>> Current research is working on reducing or eliminating dehydration so
>>> that we can provide equally clear evidence of excellent preservation with
>>> the existing process.
>>>
>>
>> Maybe I'm missing something but it seems to me that the very fact that
>> dehydration distorts things so much you can't take clear pictures of
>> ultra-structure with a electron microscope but you can with the ASC method
>> means ASC is doing a better job at preserving information with less
>> distortion.
>>
>> See:
>>> Chemical Brain Preservation and Human Suspended Animation
>>>
>>> http://www.alcor.org/Library/html/chemopreservation2.html
>>>
>>
>> From that webpage:
>>
>>
>>
>>>  "
>>> restoring function after reversal of our procedures is the most credible
>>> test of the efficacy of our procedures
>>> "
>>>
>>
>> Well yes, but nobody is going to be revived from liquid nitrogen
>> temperatures using either ALCOR's method or the ASC technology until full
>> scale Drexler style nanotechnology is developed. In the meantime we're just
>> going to have to use some other criteria for judging which does a better
>> job, and right now I can't think of a better one than good electron
>> microscope pictures.
>>
>>  "
>>> We are reluctant to settle for preservation of ultrastructure alone
>>> because this goal can always trigger objections that we are failing to
>>> preserve crucial identity-encoding parts of the brain
>>> "
>>> .
>>
>>
>> It's always possible that one method preserves some vital quality that
>> we can't yet see better than the other, but there is nothing we can do
>> about that because we can't see it, the best we can do right now is pick
>> the technology that best preserves the qualities we can see, and that would
>> be ASC   
>>
>>
>>>
>>> "
>>> we want to minimize the time the patient has to be retained in low
>>> temperature care.
>>> "
>>>
>>
>> I want that too, but even assuming both methods preserve enough
>> information to bring the person back I can see no reason why a ALCOR
>> preserved patient would come back one hour before a patient preserved with
>> the ASC method.  
>>
>>
>>> >
>>> At Alcor we believe that a credible cryonics organization should aim for
>>> perfecting human suspended animation.
>>
>>
>> The day
>> human suspended animation
>>  is perfected will be the same day nobody ever needs to go into
>> suspended animation again. If the technology is good enough to bring a
>> vitrified brain cooled to liquid nitrogen temperatures back to full
>> function and health then killing cancer cells or fixing a bad heart would
>> be child's play.
>>
>> Preserving enough undistributed information to bring a person back is
>> hard, but using that information to actually do it is far far harder; ALCOR
>> is a small organization and can't do all the heavy lifting by itself, if
>> the information is preserved sooner or later Nanotechnology will be
>> developed that can do something with it. I think right now ALCOR should
>> concentrate on making sure future technology has something to work with.
>>
>> "
>>> Making slices out of a whole vitrified brain while vitrified is a tough
>>> problem. It is easier to make thin slices out of a whole brain that’s been
>>> turned into solid plastic because the resin used is designed for being cut
>>> into thin slices for microscopy. So plastination has a natural advantage in
>>> this
>>
>>
>> 
>> That may have been a valid point 5 years ago when
>> those words were
>>  written, but the ASC brain has been warmed up and is no longer
>> vitrified, and it shows better ultra-structure than the ALCOR preserved
>> brain after it has been warmed up and is no longer vitrified.
>>
>> "
>>> After initial stabilization with aldehyde fixatives, a chemopreservation
>>> patient would have to be transported to a dedicated facility for treatment
>>> with even more toxic chemicals such as osmium tetroxide and plastic resin
>>> monomers. Osmium tetroxide is a volatile and extremely powerful oxidizer
>>> "
>>>
>>
>> Osmium tetroxide
>> just used for staining to get good pictures from a electron microscope,
>> it wouldn't be used if you were trying to preserve a life and not do
>> research.
>>
>> " 
>>> In the case of chemopreservation, the absence of low temperatures could
>>> permit ongoing degradation of poorly fixed and embedded tissue
>>> " 
>>> .
>>
>>
>> No longer relevant, both ASC and ALCOR would store brains at the same
>> low  temperature.
>>
>> 
>>
>>
>>> > 
>>> Being able to chemically preserve brain slices is not comparable to
>>> preserving entire human brains.
>>>
>>
>>  No longer relevant
>> , ASC has preserved an entire pig brain.
>>
>> The reason I'm making a big deal out of all this is... well... because
>> its a matter of life and death.
>>
>>  John K Clark
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20171129/01af0f95/attachment.html>