Jump to content

Welcome to FutureTimeline.forum
Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to create topics, post replies to existing threads, give reputation to your fellow members, get your own private messenger, post status updates, manage your profile and so much more. If you already have an account, login here - otherwise create an account for free today!

These ads will disappear if you register on the forum

Photo

When do you think anti-aging would be around?

aging upload nano tech ai moores law

  • Please log in to reply
48 replies to this topic

#41
sasuke2490

sasuke2490

    veteran gamer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 464 posts

I think sens could possibly work. The time-frame seems optimistic, they would need more funding. Nanotechnology could possibly develop fast enough by 2050 if i had to place a date on anti-aging. Help speed up research with BOINC: https://join.worldco...amId=DDSTCB5H12


https://www.instagc.com/scorch9722

Use my link for free steam wallet codes if you want


#42
Blanford

Blanford

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

This is a fantastic serum and my long time favorite. Just use this serum provides a great backdrop for other moisturizers and/or face creams. It contains many vitamins and ingredients used to provide anti-aging properties, moisturizer  and collagen stimulation.It stops the anti aging process on the skin.Remains young looking and healthy skin.My days are going great with dermalmd serum.



#43
Alpha Centari

Alpha Centari

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 71 posts

I'm still in my teens so I'm certain that I'll live to see anti-aging as long as research in the field of longevity continues. According to this site longevity treatments able to halt aging may appear in the year 2065, in which case I'll be 64. :)



#44
TranscendingGod

TranscendingGod

    2020's the decade of our reckoning

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,556 posts
  • LocationGeorgia

It is already around just not for humans. 


The growth of computation is doubly exponential growth. 


#45
kjaggard

kjaggard

    Artificer

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,827 posts
  • Locationwhere fanciful imaginings and hard won knowledge meet to genesis the future.

I read an article not that long ago where they talked with Degrey and he gave the whole "the first person to live to 1000 is already alive today." but then they talked with other experts he works with and one of them mentioned that we have to realise there are two sides to him. There is the side that tells the attention grabbing soundbites to the public and media, and then there is the serious researcher who doesn't believe in indefinate lifespan.

 

And as sad as that makes me it's also something far easier for me to believe.

 

It's far more likely in my mind that we will be able to repair the pain and dabilitation of aging bit by bit.like a course of therapy to rebuild joints and restore mobility. But in the long run it mostly just makes one healthy and productive for their entire life, not extend the life much. There will be some incidental life span increases, but likely notmuch beyond the 110s for most people. The top end might reach the 130s to 150s for the few extraordinary inidividuals.

 

I think as we beging to produce whole body transplants of younger selves we might start to push past the 180s for the majority of the population, but I also feel that we will hit a wall along the way in the degradation of the brain after certain points. We might be able to patch in cybernetic augments to pull some of the duty of atrophying sections of brain, and injections of neural stemcells to give it new leases on life, but it seems likely to me that some of this will only work so far. Eventually you change the brain so much it's not the same person, or the fundamental sense of self resides in a section that just can't be propped up anymore and just gives out.


Live content within small means. Seek elegance rather than luxury, Grace over fashion and wealth over riches.
Listen to clouds and mountains, children and sages. Act bravely, think boldly.
Await occasions, never make haste. Find wonder and awe, by experiencing the everyday.

#46
superexistence

superexistence

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 273 posts

I read an article not that long ago where they talked with Degrey and he gave the whole "the first person to live to 1000 is already alive today." but then they talked with other experts he works with and one of them mentioned that we have to realise there are two sides to him. There is the side that tells the attention grabbing soundbites to the public and media, and then there is the serious researcher who doesn't believe in indefinate lifespan.

 

And as sad as that makes me it's also something far easier for me to believe.

 

It's far more likely in my mind that we will be able to repair the pain and dabilitation of aging bit by bit.like a course of therapy to rebuild joints and restore mobility. But in the long run it mostly just makes one healthy and productive for their entire life, not extend the life much. There will be some incidental life span increases, but likely notmuch beyond the 110s for most people. The top end might reach the 130s to 150s for the few extraordinary inidividuals.

 

I think as we beging to produce whole body transplants of younger selves we might start to push past the 180s for the majority of the population, but I also feel that we will hit a wall along the way in the degradation of the brain after certain points. We might be able to patch in cybernetic augments to pull some of the duty of atrophying sections of brain, and injections of neural stemcells to give it new leases on life, but it seems likely to me that some of this will only work so far. Eventually you change the brain so much it's not the same person, or the fundamental sense of self resides in a section that just can't be propped up anymore and just gives out.

 

Aubrey in his talks though shy's away from immortality or even indefinite lifespan talk, he simply wants ageing to be sickness

free, whether that's because he believes it will or will not happen is unknown but if he is selling investment based on the idea

that you will not die of old age only for him to lie to his investors on that being horseshit would make this all a bit illegal.

 

But that's just Aubreys approach, the work coming out of George Churches lab at Harvard are based on epigentic changes.

They see ageing as the body failing to read the DNA code correctly, he seems quietly confident indefinite life span is within

ten years.

 

David Sinclairs work seems to be more based on perfect health for the length of a normal lifespan.

 

I personally don't think many will believe indefinite lifespan will be available until its actually here just because it sounds so

far fetched.

We keep seeing articles declare 125 is the absolute limit only to be told later that's not true.

Just as in naysayers say immortality dreamers want it to be true it can be equally said those same naysayers want it

to be a lie.



#47
Alpha Centari

Alpha Centari

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 71 posts

 

I read an article not that long ago where they talked with Degrey and he gave the whole "the first person to live to 1000 is already alive today." but then they talked with other experts he works with and one of them mentioned that we have to realise there are two sides to him. There is the side that tells the attention grabbing soundbites to the public and media, and then there is the serious researcher who doesn't believe in indefinate lifespan.

 

And as sad as that makes me it's also something far easier for me to believe.

 

It's far more likely in my mind that we will be able to repair the pain and dabilitation of aging bit by bit.like a course of therapy to rebuild joints and restore mobility. But in the long run it mostly just makes one healthy and productive for their entire life, not extend the life much. There will be some incidental life span increases, but likely notmuch beyond the 110s for most people. The top end might reach the 130s to 150s for the few extraordinary inidividuals.

 

I think as we beging to produce whole body transplants of younger selves we might start to push past the 180s for the majority of the population, but I also feel that we will hit a wall along the way in the degradation of the brain after certain points. We might be able to patch in cybernetic augments to pull some of the duty of atrophying sections of brain, and injections of neural stemcells to give it new leases on life, but it seems likely to me that some of this will only work so far. Eventually you change the brain so much it's not the same person, or the fundamental sense of self resides in a section that just can't be propped up anymore and just gives out.

 

Aubrey in his talks though shy's away from immortality or even indefinite lifespan talk, he simply wants ageing to be sickness

free, whether that's because he believes it will or will not happen is unknown but if he is selling investment based on the idea

that you will not die of old age only for him to lie to his investors on that being horseshit would make this all a bit illegal.

 

But that's just Aubreys approach, the work coming out of George Churches lab at Harvard are based on epigentic changes.

They see ageing as the body failing to read the DNA code correctly, he seems quietly confident indefinite life span is within

ten years.

 

David Sinclairs work seems to be more based on perfect health for the length of a normal lifespan.

 

I personally don't think many will believe indefinite lifespan will be available until its actually here just because it sounds so

far fetched.

We keep seeing articles declare 125 is the absolute limit only to be told later that's not true.

Just as in naysayers say immortality dreamers want it to be true it can be equally said those same naysayers want it

to be a lie.

 

Indeed, as the saying goes "Seeing is believing." Futurists and various scientific researchers often like to predict what type of technology we'll have or how advanced we'll be in so in so years, but only time will tell how more advanced our society will be in 10 years, 100 years, 1000 years, 100,000 years, 1,000,000 years and so on. I'm a highly open minded and optimistic person and weather or not it's possible for us humans to reach immortality is unknown but one thing is certain, our knowledge of longevity is growing each day and so is the case with other scientific fields being researched on, and each year that passes our civilization is more advanced than the last. 


  • Casey likes this

#48
orion

orion

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Eat healthy veggies and fruits to get young look.I take care of my health and  eat healthy foods.Try to use dermalmd wrinkle reduction serum.its doing better.



#49
Vivian

Vivian

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 25 posts

If singularity arrives at 2045, I think we can see anti ageing nanobots on our bodies by 2050. After singularity, tecnology will advance at a very fast rate, so we use pcs to power our brains, that power pcs even more, so, if you live to the 2050, I think you have great changes to live indefinitely. I will be on my 59 years old by 2050, my mom would be at her 87 years. I think everyone here knows that they might die before anti-ageing tecnologies, but theres also a real chance that we get them and live indefinitely. 

 

Like this song says, we are hoping for the best , but expecting the worst, we dont have the power , but we never say never: 

 

Now, can you imagine when this race is won? You will never have to lose someone you love. Newer generations will just add to the existing ones. Of course, we would have to colonize other planets.







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: aging, upload, nano, tech, ai, moores law

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users