This topic has been repeatedly worked over, but little seems to stick, and we continue to see "evidence" for pessimism based merely on uninformed or irrelevant assertions.
A frequent remark is that most scientists agree that cryonics has a negligible chance of working. But these scientists speak mostly from ignorance or bias (Harold Meryman, among others, admitted to me in writing that he was opposed on religious grounds, and others merely relied on their supposed
expertise and prestige.) Some used variations of the Drake equation to "prove" statistically that the odds are highly adverse. The problem is, to my knowledge, not one of those scientists/mathematicians showed any actual calculations and none had any competence in the foundations of probability theory.
Many of these people are generally smarter and more successful than I am, but that is irrelevant. The fact is that hardly any scientists or mathematicians understand the foundations of probability theory, and I am one who does. My essay on this topic, based on a paper I wrote around 50 years ago,
is available in full on the CI web site, cryonics.org. Some of it is inaccessible to the untrained, but there is enough for the average reader to get his teeth into.
My conclusion--an optimistic reading for probable revival--is of course tentative, since so much remains unknown, and because it omits such possible factors as a major asteroid hit or a major plague. My main assumption is just that civilization will continue and advance.
My challenge to detractors: Show your calculations and the assumptions on which they are based. Let's see some real, relevant numbers, not just spurious claims to authority.
In passing, there have been repeated statements that almost nothing has been done in 50 years of cryonics research. The fact is far otherwise, even though for most of that time the cryonics organizations were very small, very poor, and growing very slowly. We always knew the importance of better and testable results, and both CI and Alcor have demonstrated procedures that
are superior to uncontrolled freezing. CI's vitrification procedure, applied to rat brain slices, shows revival after rewarming from liquid nitrogen, not only by structural but also by functional criteria. CI's older procedure, applied to rabbit brain pieces (after anaesthesia) showed coordinated
electrical activity in networks of neurons. Yuri Pichugin no longer works for CI, but Aschwin and Chana de Woolf are doing good work.
Many problems remain, but disregard of evidence and of the importance of improvement has never been among them in the cryonics leadership.
The best thing you can do, without special resources, is work gradually and tactfully on your own relatives and friends. Don't stress an outlandish future, just the love between family and friends.
I have seen it stated before that the probability of nuclear fusion working is 100% (Well let's say 99.9% - I am not comfortable with saying that any future prediction is 100% probable) provided enough money and resources is pumped into the goal of achieving workable nuclear fusion.
I was wondering if there is a special type of person who could confidently say the same sort of thing about cryonics? This special type of person would be something like a monk dedicated to the cryonics movement.
(As an aside - When one talks about confidence and probability in the same breath, one says things like - We are 90% confident that there is a 99% probability of success. )
Sorry, your interpretation is incorrect. If you read my essay, you will see that the probability of any event has an objective measurement, or more than one, since different observers work with different data.
I havn't read your essay yet, but I am interested in finding it and reading it. Statistics and Probability is another interest of mine.
However, the question still remains. Is there anyone who knows so much about cryonics and cryobiology that they would beable to honestly say that is certain that cryonics will work provide enough money and resources is pumped into it? If there are no such people, which people would come closest to being such people?
Geoff, you are talking to Robert Ettinger, the father of cryonics. If anyone would be an expert, I think Mr. Ettinger would, although I'm sure there are several people qualified to offer contrasting opinions.
Thanks for the advice, however I already know who Mr Ettinger is.
Decades ago, I bought two copies of his book "The Prospect of Immortality".
I have read the book twice. The first day I read it, it took me less than two days to read it. I was also saddened to hear of his recent deanimation and hope that his future reanimation goes well.
At high school, I did most of my growing up in the same state - Michigan.
/////////////
This topic has been repeatedly worked over, but little seems to stick, and we continue to see "evidence" for pessimism based merely on uninformed or irrelevant assertions.
/////////////
because cryonics as it is currently perceived would be a disruptive cultural force, and such disruptions are not welcomed. This assessment is made subconsciously.
////////////////////
A frequent remark is that most scientists agree that cryonics has a negligible chance of working. But these scientists speak mostly from ignorance or bias
///////////////
These sounds they make are made as animals, members of homo sapiens. Does a lion not roar and does a lamb not bleat? Will a crocodile not grunt? Would you have a homo sapiens--a "man"-- make sounds outside of his ken?
/////////////////////
(Harold Meryman, among others, admitted to me in writing that he was opposed on religious grounds,
//////////////
Cultural grounds, to be honest. Religion and culture, for the most part, are inextricably intertwined.
/////////////////////
and others merely relied on their supposed expertise and prestige.) Some used variations of the Drake equation to "prove" statistically that the odds are highly adverse. The problem is, to my knowledge, not one of those scientists/mathematicians showed any actual calculations and none had any competence in the foundations of probability theory.
//////////////////
Pretexts, all. You don't see this after over 40 years?
Bark Bark, Woof Woof!
Baa!
Cock-a-doodle doo!
Each of us emits the cry of our species. How else can we animals survive? If we want to live forever in the future, Bob, we have to make cryonics utter the right sounds.
//////////////////////
Many of these people are generally smarter and more successful than I am, but that is irrelevant. The fact is that hardly any scientists or mathematicians understand the foundations of probability theory, and I am one who does.
/////////////////
Or maybe your operating instructions never quite got imprinted properly. Just like mine.
So we are lacking the instructions that tell us that cryonics and immortality are taboo.
/////////////////
My conclusion--an optimistic reading for probable revival--is of course tentative, since so much remains unknown, and because it omits such possible factors as a major asteroid hit or a major plague. My main assumption is just that civilization will continue and advance.
My challenge to detractors: Show your calculations and the assumptions on which they are based. Let's see some real, relevant numbers, not just spurious claims to authority.
////////
Optimism and rationality have little to do with it, Bob. We are animals. Pull out the right instrument and make the right sounds, and you can draw any animal into your trap.
////////////////////
Many problems remain, but disregard of evidence and of the importance of improvement has never been among them in the cryonics leadership.
/////////////
Now you are talking to homo sapiens rationaliticus. But we are a very small population, Bob.
//////////////
The best thing you can do, without special resources, is work gradually and tactfully on your own relatives and friends. Don't stress an outlandish future, just the love between family and friends.
/////////////////
Isn't the chances of being revived assured? (Assured providing one is put into cryonic suspension, there is some ongoing progress within the world, there are no accidents, no nuclear extermination, and no financial (or other)failure of one's cryonics provider etc) Isn't the only real question - Is the entity that is revived from one's deanimated body, yourself or someone else?
