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!
Photo

Achieving the "Impossible" - will we ever revive people who died before cryogenic preservation?


  • Please log in to reply
22 replies to this topic

#1
FutureOfToday

FutureOfToday

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,685 posts
Do you think we will ever be able to revive people from hundreds of years ago just with skeletons, or even what we think is impossible today - revive people who were cremated and whose ashes were scattered years ago? Yes, it seems impossible - but by the time we're "playing God" (i.e. creating new universes at will with the power of our minds), surely this will become a possibility?

#2
Raklian

Raklian

    An Immortal In The Making

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,171 posts
  • LocationRaleigh, NC

Who the heck knows?

 

 

Here's a quote from Arthur C. Clarke -

 

If an elderly but distinguished scientist says that something is possible, he is almost certainly right; but if he says that it is impossible, he is very probably wrong.

 

Edited by Raklian, 12 August 2013 - 07:15 PM.

What are you without the sum of your parts?

#3
Ru1138

Ru1138

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,190 posts
  • LocationIllinois

I'm not sure. There's the fact that entropy will destroy anything that doesn't maintain itself over time. So the brains of the dead will have been long gone.

 

But there's also wildcard possibilities like the Higgs Singlet.


What difference does it make?


#4
Zeitgeist123

Zeitgeist123

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,813 posts

..or the "omega point" theory which, come to think of it, is pretty much what we in this forum describe as the singularity + religious hogwash...

 

from wikipedia:

"

  • The universe has finite spatial size and the topology of a three-sphere;
  • There are no event horizons, implying the future c-boundary is a point, called the Omega Point;
  • Sentient life must eventually engulf the entire universe and control it;
  • The amount of information processed between now and the Omega Point is infinite;
  • The amount of information stored in the universe asymptotically goes to infinity as the Omega Point is approached.[2]

Key to Tipler's exploration of the Omega Point is that the supposition of a closed universe evolving towards a future collapse. Within this universe, Tipler assumes a massive processing capability. As the universe becomes smaller, the processing capability becomes larger, due to the decreasing cost of communications as the systems shrink in size. At the same time, information from previously disconnected points in space becomes visible, giving the processors access to more and more information. Tipler's Omega Point occurs when the processing capability effectively becomes infinite, as the processors will be able to simulate every possible future before the universe ends - a state also known as "Aleph".

 

Within this environment, Tipler imagines that intelligent beings, human personalities, will be run as simulations within the system. As a result, after the Omega Point, humans will have omnipotence, able to see all of history and predict all of the future. Additionally, as all history becomes available, past personalities will be able to run as well. Within the simulation, this appears to be the dead rising. Tipler equates this state with the Christian heaven.

 

 

Technological singularity

 

Some transhumanists argue that the accelerating technological progress inherent in the Law of Accelerating Returns will, in the relatively near future, lead to what Vernor Vinge called a technological singularity or "prediction wall." These transhumanists believe we will soon enter a time in which we must eventually make the transition to a "runaway positive feedbackloop"[citation needed] in high-level autonomous machine computation. A result will be that our technological and computational tools eventually completely surpass human capacities.[3] Some transhumanist writings refer to this moment as the Omega Point, paying homage to Teilhard's prior use of the term. Other transhumanists, in particular Ray Kurzweil, refer to the technological singularity as simply "The Singularity" "


Edited by Zeitgeist123, 12 August 2013 - 10:08 PM.

“Philosophy is a pretty toy if one indulges in it with moderation at the right time of life. But if one pursues it further than one should, it is absolute ruin." - Callicles to Socrates


#5
Alric

Alric

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,087 posts

It is possible but very unlikely. I don't think you can revive someone with their personalty intact from a skeleton, no matter how advanced the technology is. However it may be possible to scan their mind if you travel back in time to when they were alive. You wouldn't need to travel physically back in time but if you were able to view it and gain information from it, you could possibly scan their mind. Also if you were to run a simulation of the entire universe on a computer, it might replicate everything that has ever happened in which case the computer to replicate the person's mind and they would be revived inside the computer. 

 

Both time travel and a computer advanced enough to recreate the entire universe exactly as our own are both extremely advanced and difficult to create. However, theoretically if you were able to achieve them, it might be possible to revive a person.



#6
Futurist

Futurist

    Aspiring cross-dresser

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,802 posts
  • LocationSouthern California, United States of America, Planet Earth

I don't think so, at least not without time travel and going into parallel universes. Skeletons don't have any minds at all anymore.


Edited by Futurist, 13 August 2013 - 12:46 AM.


#7
Jared

Jared

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 130 posts

So basically, this is to be used against people who try to escape by committing suicide, right?  Or if you're torturing someone and you accidentally kill them?  Great...



#8
FutureGuy

FutureGuy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 557 posts
So basically, this is to be used against people who try to escape by committing suicide, right?  Or if you're torturing someone and you accidentally kill them?  Great...

 

 

Following that line of thought, no technology whatsoever should've been developed in the first place. Of course there's going to be someone who uses it for his own interests hurting others, but the same could be said about any technology, starting with fire and hunting tools made of bones and rocks, up to firepowder and nuclear energy. It's the same. There's pros and cons.



#9
RayMC

RayMC

    F̷̲̅ᴜ̷̲̅ᴛ̷̲̅ᴜ̷̲̅ʀ̷̲̅ᴇ̷̲̅

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 262 posts
I think this is impossible. Surely, we can create clones who will act exactly like him/her, but reviving the actual* person? Not possible.

“Wʜᴀᴛ ɪs ɴᴏᴡ ᴘʀᴏᴠᴇᴅ, ᴡᴀs ᴏɴᴄᴇ ᴏɴʟʏ ɪᴍᴀɢɪɴᴇᴅ.” - Wɪʟʟɪᴀᴍ Bʟᴀᴋᴇ


#10
FutureOfToday

FutureOfToday

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,685 posts

So basically, this is to be used against people who try to escape by committing suicide, right?  Or if you're torturing someone and you accidentally kill them?  Great...

That's like saying that the internet was invented for cyber-bullying and child porn.

#11
Galgation

Galgation

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 16 posts

By the time humanity can create universe and control the very fabric of space i don't see why we can't go the extra leap and bring back the dead. Now whether this person remembers everything from when he was alive is different, it's not to hard to get someones DNA and clone them, but is that clone really them? So possible, yes, even probable, but unlikely that the people you bring back will even know who they are.



#12
Russell's teapot

Russell's teapot

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 58 posts
  • LocationNorway

Personally I think that the apparently probability-based events on the atomic level are determined by hitherto undiscovered deterministic mechanisms. If current quantum mechanics is very incomplete, and we do indeed live in a completely deterministic Universe (which in my mind seems like the most plausible scenario), our descendants or other superintelligent beings - if they're intelligence and technology is Godlike - may be able to bring back lost Minds by using extremely advanced computers to peer into the past. This prediction, of course, is based on the assumption that consciousness is some sort of abstract "pattern" that can be "started" again.

 

If some sort of time-travel is possible, there may be other ways to bring back the dead. Also, I think that our cognitive capacities are so extremely limited that we can't possibly make any very accurate predictions when it comes to what the technology of hyperintelligent beings may accomplish ...

 

Maybe we're already revived?


Edited by Russell's teapot, 15 August 2013 - 10:38 PM.

Theorem: It is always too soon for despair. Proof: We do not know our fates.

- Robert C. W. Ettinger


#13
Jared

Jared

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 130 posts
Also, I think that our cognitive capacities are so extremely limited that we can't possible make any very accurate predictions when it comes to what the technology of hyperintelligent beings may accomplish ...

Sorry, I can't let this go any longer.  It's not just you.  I've been seeing this a lot lately.  Why do some people refuse to use adverbs, and simply use adjectives instead?  I just don't get it.  Is this an actual dialect?  Are you just lazy?  Was it a typo?  I don't think I've heard anyone talk that way, but I see it in writing all the time...



#14
Cody930

Cody930

    An Apple Pie from Scratch

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,522 posts
  • LocationNew Jersey, US
Also, I think that our cognitive capacities are so extremely limited that we can't possible make any very accurate predictions when it comes to what the technology of hyperintelligent beings may accomplish ...

Sorry, I can't let this go any longer.  It's not just you.  I've been seeing this a lot lately.  Why do some people refuse to use adverbs, and simply use adjectives instead?  I just don't get it.  Is this an actual dialect?  Are you just lazy?  Was it a typo?  I don't think I've heard anyone talk that way, but I see it in writing all the time...

 

For some English may not be their first language or it's just a missed typo. 


"Since we first emerged, a few million years ago in East Africa, we have meandered our way around the planet. There are now people on every continent and the remotest islands, from pole to pole, from Mount Everest to the Dead Sea, on the ocean bottoms and even, occasionally, in residence 200 miles up - humans, like the gods of old, living in the sky."


#15
SG-1

SG-1

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,653 posts
  • LocationUS - Arkansas
Maybe they were using a smartphone and it corrected it that way? Grammar nazi lol

Hey.  Stop reading.  The post is over.


#16
Cody930

Cody930

    An Apple Pie from Scratch

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,522 posts
  • LocationNew Jersey, US

^ That too. Happens to me all too often. :p


"Since we first emerged, a few million years ago in East Africa, we have meandered our way around the planet. There are now people on every continent and the remotest islands, from pole to pole, from Mount Everest to the Dead Sea, on the ocean bottoms and even, occasionally, in residence 200 miles up - humans, like the gods of old, living in the sky."


#17
Russell's teapot

Russell's teapot

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 58 posts
  • LocationNorway
Also, I think that our cognitive capacities are so extremely limited that we can't possible make any very accurate predictions when it comes to what the technology of hyperintelligent beings may accomplish ...

Sorry, I can't let this go any longer.  It's not just you.  I've been seeing this a lot lately.  Why do some people refuse to use adverbs, and simply use adjectives instead?  I just don't get it.  Is this an actual dialect?  Are you just lazy?  Was it a typo?  I don't think I've heard anyone talk that way, but I see it in writing all the time...

It was a typo. I actually noticed it immidiately after I made the post. Since it was just a small typo, and didn't change the meaning of the sentence in any way, I didn't see any need to correct it. To satisfy your offended mind, I'll correct it now. Live long and prosper.


Theorem: It is always too soon for despair. Proof: We do not know our fates.

- Robert C. W. Ettinger


#18
Infinity

Infinity

    New Member

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 6 posts
  • LocationNew York City, NY

  Found this interesting video

http://bigthink.com/...genics-is-bogus



#19
Casey

Casey

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 681 posts
not watching that video because it will probably just make me angry, going to assume the narrator is your typical closedminded and shortsighted anti-science dipshit

#20
Jared

Jared

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 130 posts
Also, I think that our cognitive capacities are so extremely limited that we can't possible make any very accurate predictions when it comes to what the technology of hyperintelligent beings may accomplish ...

Sorry, I can't let this go any longer.  It's not just you.  I've been seeing this a lot lately.  Why do some people refuse to use adverbs, and simply use adjectives instead?  I just don't get it.  Is this an actual dialect?  Are you just lazy?  Was it a typo?  I don't think I've heard anyone talk that way, but I see it in writing all the time...

It was a typo. I actually noticed it immidiately after I made the post. Since it was just a small typo, and didn't change the meaning of the sentence in any way, I didn't see any need to correct it. To satisfy your offended mind, I'll correct it now. Live long and prosper.

Sorry for being a grammar nazi, it's just that I've seen that so much I started to think people actually thought it should be that way.  I used to think it was a typo when Europeans would say, for example, 5,2 instead of 5.2.  But it happened so often, I had to look it up, and sure enough, they were doing it on purpose...






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users